Does a post-indictment lineup constitute a violation of an accused's privilege against self-incrimination?

[4 Cal.App.3d 522] In holding that a post-indictment lineup involved no violation of an accused's privilege against self-incrimination, the court, in United States v. Wade, 399 U.S. 218, 87 S.Ct. 1926, 18 L.Ed.2d 1149, states (388 U.S. at 221--222, 87 S.Ct. at 1929--1930): 'Neither the lineup itself nor anything shown by this record that Wade was required to do in the lineup violated his privilege against self-incrimination. * * * We have no doubt that compelling the accused merely to exhibit his person for observation by a prosecution witness prior to trial involves no compulsion of the accused to give evidence

Page 442

Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263, 87 S.Ct. 1951, 18 L.Ed.2d 1178, established the admissibility of handwriting exemplars, the court stating (388 U.S. 266--267, 87 S.Ct. 1953): 'One's voice and handwriting are, of course, means of communication. It by no means follows, however, that every compulsion of an accused to use his voice or write compels a communication within the cover of the privilege. A mere handwriting exemplar, in contrast to the content of what is written, like the voice or body itself, is an identifying physical characteristic outside its protection.'