Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2330 U.S. v. Wright

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 25, 2011//

10-2330 U.S. v. Wright

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//February 25, 2011//

Listen to this article

Criminal Procedure
Witness immunity

A prosecutor may decline to call a witness and give immunity to a witness she fears may perjure himself.
“In our case, the government informed Wright of the decision not to call Holt, as well as of the potentially exculpatory nature of Holt’s testimony, as soon as the interview with Holt was completed. Granted, this interview took place shortly before trial, but as the government had no reason to believe Holt would give a potentially exculpatory statement, there is no reason to think that this was a tactical delay on the government’s part. In fact, it looks like the eleventh-hour statement from Holt took the government by surprise as it was expected that, if called, Holt would help drive another nail into Wright’s coffin.”
“Further, avoiding future violations of the law, such as potential perjury, is hardly an unjustifiable and illegitimate government objective. Here, the government made it clear, through multiple representatives, that the concern with Holt’s testimony was the fear, based on inconsistencies between his statement and the facts as the government understood them, that Holt would perjure himself. The government went so far as to explain that immunity for other violations could be considered, but that immunity for potential perjury would be out of the question.”

Affirmed.

10-2330 U.S. v. Wright

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Clevert, J., Evans, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests