In a trial for sexual assault of a child, Defendant testifies to the following:
On parole at time of new offense
2 prior convictions for Agg Assault w/ DW
Model Prisoner in prison - which then allows us to get on cross:

Spent 20 years in segregation in prison
In segregation b/c confirmed as a member of MM
In segregation b/c of fighting
Classifications while in prison

Trial results in a hung jury. New trial is scheduled for next week. I have the certified transcripts of the defendant's testimony. Can we introduce all of the above if the defendant chooses not to testify?

Since the defendant makes himself "unavailable" by not testifying, you can generally read his prior testimony in at re-trial. In this case, however, it sounds like the parts you want from both his direct and cross go only to law abiding nature (and maybe his credibility). Absent some unusual circumstances, why would those things be at issue(relevant) if he does not testify at the retrial? Just my opinion. Somebody think differently or have some authority either way?

Sounds like good punishment evidence when you get him next time.