Legal Opinion

In re Criminal Investigation No. 1-162

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 6, 1986No. 1130PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

GILBERT, Chief Judge.

Immunity is a legal innoculation against prosecution. When permitted it allows a prosecutor to do for a witness what Dr. Jonas Salk did for mankind — protect him. Unlike Dr. Salk, the prosecutor extracts a quid pro quo — an amulet for an appellation.

Maryland prosecutors, except for a few specific statutorily created instances, may not immunize witnesses. Despite a number of legislative attempts to vest immunization authority in prosecutors, the General Assembly has turned a deaf ear to the plaint.1

As Judge Moylan noted in Butler v. State, 55 Md.App. 409, 419, 462 A.2d…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Butler v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  2. In Re a Special Investigation No. 224Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  3. In Re a Special Investigation No. 237Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1983

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In Re Criminal Investigation No. 1-162Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API