Final answer:
The procedure that would violate a suspect's privilege against self-incrimination is being required to testify at a trial, which is protected under the Fifth Amendment. Other options like providing voice exemplars or submitting to photographing do not infringe upon this right as they are considered non-testimonial evidence.
Step-by-step explanation:
Of the options given, being required to testify at a trial would violate a suspect's privilege against self-incrimination. This right is protected under the Fifth Amendment and famously known as "taking the Fifth." Under this provision, individuals are not compelled to give evidence that could admit guilt in a criminal case.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona required that suspects be informed of their rights, including the right against self-incrimination, before being interrogated in police custody.
Conversely, suspects can be required to provide voice exemplars, submit to photographing, or have blood and other physical evidence drawn without violating the privilege against self-incrimination as these are considered non-testimonial evidence.
It is only when the suspect is compelled to provide testimonial evidence, such as testifying at a trial, that the protection is invoked.
Recent rulings, like Berghuis v. Thompkins and Salinas v. Texas, elucidate the conditions under which the right to remain silent must be explicitly invoked.