Is there a general obligation of a prosecutor to provide immunity to witnesses in a civil case?

A prosecutor is " 'not under a general obligation to provide immunity to witnesses in order to assist a defendant.' " (People v. Masters (2016) 62 Cal.4th 1019, 1051 (Masters.) And, "California courts have no authority to confer use immunity on witnesses." (Ibid.) However, there may be a claim of prosecutorial misconduct warranting a retrial "[i]f a defendant can show that the prosecutor refused to grant immunity " 'with the deliberate intention of distorting the judicial factfinding process . . . ." ' " (Ibid.) To prevail on such a claim, a defendant must satisfy each of the following five factors: (1) witness immunity was properly sought in the trial court; (2) the defense witness was available to testify; (3) the offered testimony was clearly

Page 9

exculpatory; (4) the testimony was essential; and (5) there were any strong governmental interests, which countervail against granting immunity. (Masters, at pp. 1051-1052.) We review de novo to determine whether there was prosecutorial misconduct that "constituted outrageous governmental conduct in violation of defendant's due process rights . . . ." (People v. Uribe (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 836, 860.)