Counselman v. Hitchcock

Counselman v. Hitchcock

Counselman v. Hitchcock (142 U.S. 547) (1892) was a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that not incriminating an individual for testimony was not the same as not requiring them to testify at all. The court reasoned that as long as evidence arising from the compelled testimony could incriminate the individual in any way, the Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination was not satisfied. The court then passed the broader "transactional immunity" statute.[1][2]

Reflist


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Нужно сделать НИР?

Look at other dictionaries:

  • List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 142 — This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 142:SCOTUSTable | data =SCOTUSRow case name = Sparhawk v. Yerkes Same page = 1 decision date = decision year = 1891SCOTUSRow case name = New Orleans Co v. Jopes page = 18… …   Wikipedia

  • Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution — United States of America This article is part of the series: United States Constitution Original text of the Constitution Preamble Articles of the Constitution I · …   Wikipedia

  • incrimination — The act of accusing or charging with the commission of a crime or of making it appear that one is guilty of a crime. Rendering a person liable to a criminal prosecution, as by giving or furnishing evidence against him. Counselman v Hitchcock, 142 …   Ballentine's law dictionary

  • Robert Bloch — Infobox Writer name = Robert Albert Bloch imagesize = caption = pseudonym = birthdate = birth date|mf=yes|1917|4|5 birthplace = Chicago, Illinois, United States deathdate = Death date and age|mf=yes|1994|9|23|1917|4|5 deathplace = Los Angeles,… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”