In the case of Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, the United States Supreme Court held that:
A. if the federal government grants immunity to a witness, the state may still use the witness's testimony, as long as it is transactional testimony.
B. if the federal government grants immunity to a witness, the state may still use the witness's testimony, as long as the witness was granted conditional immunity.
C. if a state grants immunity to a witness, the federal government is not bound by the state's immunity and may still compel the witness to testify in a federal prosecution.
D. if a state grants immunity to a witness, the federal government is bound by the state's immunity and may not compel the witness to testify in a federal prosecution.
Answer: D
You might also like to view...
Barbiturates are classified as:
a. narcotics. b. depressants. c. hallucinogens. d. stimulants.
Regardless of the type of ADR, the paralegal's most vital role is information gathering and analysis.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
What was the most significant outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in In re Gault?
What will be an ideal response?
Crimes committed in places beyond the ____ of any state may be prosecuted on the federal level
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word