Eighteen Thousand Gallons of Distilled Spirits

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• failing to catalog or seal the statements resulted in the inference of derivative use, allowing the inference that the witness’s statements were obtained prior to the immunized statements, whether or not it was seen or relied upon
• summarizing United States v. Byrd, 765 F.2d 1524, 1530-31 (11th Cir., 1985)
• The “Government may not prosecute unless it can show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the prosecutorial decision was untainted by the immunized testimony.”
• “Had the Government decided to prosecute appellant prior to his immunized testimony, it would be obvious that the prosecutorial decision was independent of his testimony.”
• immunized statements may play no role in the prosecutorial decision
• perjury related to alleged marijuana use

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).