United States v. Kathleen Harris

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “the government bears ‘the heavy burden of proving that all of the evidence it proposes to use was derived from legitimate independent sources’ ”
• recognizing that use immunity conferred by agreement bound government in same manner as immunity statute, in that it could not “use the immunized testimony or any evidence derived from it either directly or indirectly”
• holding that the prosecution failed to meet its Kastigar burden because its failure to follow reliable taint procedures left it “unable to eliminate the significant possibility that it used ... compelled testimony as an ‘investigatory lead’ ”
• noting that use of compelled testimony does not require reversal if error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
• detailing government’s appeal of indictment’s partial dismissal on ground that it violated provisions of use immunity agreement, infringing on defendant’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
• “It is true that courts have generally declined to erect a per se rule requiring withdrawal of a prosecutor or other government official who may have been exposed to immunized testimony, and we do not erect such a rule here.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).