Citation network
United States Vs. Apfelbaum
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 03, 1980
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Distinguished
-
U.S. 115 (1980) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. ApfelbaumSearch
-
U.S. 115 (1980) United States v. ApfelbaumSearch
-
a reexamination of the broad transactional immunity statute enacted in response to this Court's decision in Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
U. S. 547 (1892). See Kastigar v. UnitedSearch
-
privilege against self-incrimination. . . . It is designed to reflect the use-restriction immunity concept of Murphy v. WaterfrontSearch
-
the transaction immunity concept of Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
Court of Appeals initially observed that a grant of immunity must be coextensive with the Fifth Amendment. Kastigar v. UnitedSearch
-
such as threats of liability in civil suits, disgrace in the community, or the loss of employment. See, e.g., Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Smith v. UnitedSearch
-
Ullmann v. UnitedSearch
-
Uniformed Sanitation Men Assn. v. CommissionerSearch
-
U. S. 279 (1968). And this Court has repeatedly recognized the validity of immunity statutes. Kastigar v. UnitedSearch
-
as well as similar laws in every State of the Union. 406 U.S. at 406 U. S. 447 . This Court, in Ullmann v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 438 . And the validity of such statutes may be traced in our decisions at least as far back as Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
supra. These cases also establish that a strict and literal reading of language in cases such as Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
U. S. 126 attack as being violative of the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination. Indeed, in Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
he danger of extending the principle announced in Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
And in Kastigar v. UnitedSearch
-
S. 454 -455. Kastigar also expressly declined a request by the petitioner to reconsider and overrule Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
supra, and Ullmann v. UnitedSearch
-
prosecutions are permissible for false answers to questions following the grant of immunity. See, e.g., United States v. WongSearch
-
of perjury has frequently been cited without any elaboration as to its underlying rationale. See, e.g., Bryson v. UnitedSearch
-
Its doctrinal foundation, as relied on in both Wong and Mandujano, is traceable to Glickstein v. UnitedSearch
-
is confronted by substantial and 'real,' and not merely trifling or imaginary, hazards of incrimination. Rogers v. UnitedSearch
-
Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
Marchetti v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 53 (1968). Marchetti, which overruled earlier decisions of this Court in United States v. KahrigerSearch
-
U. S. 22 (1953), and Lewis v. UnitedSearch
-
id. at 390 U. S. 53 , that distinction does not aid respondent here. In United States v. FreedSearch
-
he might commit Page 445 U. S. 131 perjury during the course of his immunized testimony. In United States v. BryanSearch
-
hazard that permits invocation of the Fifth Amendment. Brown v. WalkerSearch
-
Rogers v. UnitedSearch
-
of the witness' testimony as is essential to establish the corpus delicti of the offense of perjury. United States v. PatrickSearch
-
is admissible, but truthful immunized testimony is not, in a subsequent prosecution for perjury. United States v. DunnSearch
-
United States v. BerardelliSearch
-
United States v. MossSearch
-
United States v. HousandSearch
-
United States v. KurzerSearch
-
and Eighth Circuits have held that immunized testimony may be used for any purpose in such a prosecution. Daniels v. UnitedSearch
-
Edelstein v. UnitedSearch
-
A principal reason for this divergence in approach originates in the statement in Counselman v. HitchcockSearch
-
This language was reiterated only last Term in New Jersey v. PortashSearch
-
or core of the perjury offense. In Kastigar v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial