State v. Lawson

In my opinion the authorities relied upon are not controlling here. State v. Brown, 221 La. 394, 59 So.2d 431 (1952), is distinguishable on the facts. There neither the witness nor the attorney actually claimed the privilege against self-incrimination. It was claimed for the witness by the judge. This is impermissible. Reference to Wig-more sheds little light on the subject.

The better view in this situation is to permit the witness’ counsel to assert the privilege against self-incrimination on behalf of the witness. Especially is this true where, as here, the witness is a teenage girl…