State v. Conrad

The deter*3minative issue posed in this appeal is whether the prosecutor’s use of defendant’s compelled testimony before the Senate committee, which testimony is immunized by R.C. 101.44, has tainted the indictment against defendant so as to compel its dismissal. For the reasons that follow, we answer this inquiry in the affirmative, thereby reversing the decision of the court of appeals below.

At the outset, it is abundantly clear that defendant’s Senate testimony was provided use immunity pursuant to R.C. 101.44. This statutory section provides:

“Except a person who, in writing, requests…