In re Anin
Hawaii Supreme Court
Original.
1Opinion of the Court
ORAL OPINION.
Hartwell, J.
There are three questions requiring adjudication in this case, namely: (1) Upon the relator’s claim that he could not be required to answer the question propounded to him by the grand- jury, because to do so might incriminate himself; and (2) because the question was upon an immaterial matter; and (3) that no adjudication of contempt was made.
At the argument on the second question, I drew the attention of counsel to legislation upon the subject in certain states, and to the rule of common law, in the absence of controlling legislation, that a witness is not privileged…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ex Parte TerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Ex parte Fugihara OriemonHawaii Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. BrooksHawaii Supreme Court · 1960
- In re AbreuHawaii Supreme Court · 1923
- Application of Palakiko and MajorsHawaii Supreme Court · 1951
- In re BalucanHawaii Supreme Court · 1960
- In re PalakikoHawaii Supreme Court · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.