Does "transactional immunity" guarantee against prosecution for the implicated crime even if a witness's statements are used as evidence?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Friday, 170 Cal.Rptr.3d 38 (Cal. App. 2014):
10 By contrast, "transactional immunity" guarantees against any prosecution for the implicated offense, even without use of the witness's statements. (People v. Campbell (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 867, 874, 187 Cal.Rptr. 340.) In this opinion, we use the term "immunity" to refer only to use and derivative use immunity.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the law on unanimity in a criminal case where the evidence of a crime is only a single crime but the evidence supports the theory of the crime? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant's extrajudicial statements form part of the prosecution's evidence, does the trial court have to instruct sua sponte that a finding of guilt cannot be predicated on the statements alone? (California, United States of America)
What is the risk to be avoided if the evidence of a lesser but inflammatory crime is used to bolster a weak prosecution case on another crime? (California, United States of America)
When a piece of evidence in the possession of the prosecution is destroyed because the prosecution finds it necessary to consume the evidence in order to test it, does the destruction violate due process? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant admits committing a crime but denies the necessary intent for the charged crime, does other-crimes evidence admissible? (California, United States of America)
Does the prosecution have to forgo the use of relevant, persuasive evidence to prove an element of a crime because the element might also be established through other evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does the prosecution have to avoid using relevant, persuasive evidence to prove an element of a crime because that element might also be established through other evidence? (California, United States of America)
Can a jury use uncharged crime evidence to determine that defendant was more likely to have committed the charged crimes because he committed the uncharged crimes? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances of the crime scene evidence will be admitted during the penalty phase of a penalty trial, does the trial court error not to exclude the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant's statements to psychiatrists and psychologists be used as evidence in the prosecution's case-in-chief? (California, United States of America)
