Legal Opinion

Salim v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided September 12, 1984No. 83-557PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROGERS, Associate Judge.

Appellant contends on appeal that the trial court erred when it permitted two defense witnesses, who had previously testified before the grand jury which indicted appellant, to assert their Fifth Amendment privilege not to incriminate themselves. The government concedes that the trial court erred in permitting the witnesses to assert a Fifth Amendment privilege without determining whether and to what extent they had waived such privileges by testifying before the grand jury. We agree, and accordingly remand the case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Hoffman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Jaggers v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Ginyard v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
  4. Deneal v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Collins v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API