Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-43-605 (2026)

Court order approving grant of immunity — Granting of immunity only after refusal to testify

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No prosecuting attorney shall grant immunity until he has applied for and obtained in each case a written order from the judge of the circuit court approving the grant of immunity. No such immunity shall be granted by a prosecuting attorney until after the individual has declined to answer questions or has requested immunity before answering questions.

History. Acts 1973, No. 561, § 4; A.S.A. 1947, § 28-534.

Case Notes

Purpose.

Where the testimony of a defense witness was offered to impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness, to grant the defense witness immunity would defeat the purpose of this section, which is to aid the prosecution in apprehending criminals. Fears v. State, 262 Ark. 355, 556 S.W.2d 659 (1977).

Discretion of Prosecutor.

The granting of immunity is merely a statutory, not a constitutional, right and lies within the discretion of the prosecutor when he believes such grant is necessary to the public interest. Fears v. State, 262 Ark. 355, 556 S.W.2d 659 (1977).

No Immunity Granted.

The defendant in a prosecution for drug offenses was not entitled to immunity since there was never any agreement to grant immunity made by the prosecuting attorney and, even if there had been such an agreement, there was no written court approval for it. Tabor v. State, 333 Ark. 429, 971 S.W.2d 227 (1998).

Request for Immunity.

Where prosecuting attorney did not request immunity for a defense witness and there was no evidence that the defendant had ever requested that the prosecutor seek immunity for the witness, the trial court did not err in refusing to grant immunity to the witness who was also charged with a murder arising out of the same altercation, since there was no statutory authority for a request of a grant of immunity by anyone other than the prosecuting attorney. Rood v. State, 4 Ark. App. 289, 630 S.W.2d 543 (1982).

Cited: Hammers v. State, 261 Ark. 585, 550 S.W.2d 432 (1977); Hale v. State, 343 Ark. 62, 31 S.W.3d 850 (2000).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: Hale v. State, 31 S.W.3d 850 (Ark. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hale v. State, 31 S.W.3d 850 (Ark. 2000). · cites it 4× “; See Ark.Code Ann. § 16-43-605 (Repl.1999). Likewise, in Williams v.”

Tabor v. State, 971 S.W.2d 227 (Ark. 1998). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-43-605 (Repl. 1994) provides for the grant of immunity in general: No prosecuting attorney shall grant immunity until he has applied for and obtained in each case a written order from the judge of the circuit court approving the grant of immunity.”

Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Steven Mitchell-63, 2021 Ark. App. 53 (Ark. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “, section 16-43-605. 13 conduct in this matter, we agree that the untimely notice and hearing did not violate due process.”

Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Steven Mitchell-62, 2021 Ark. App. 43 (Ark. Ct. App. 2021). “, § 16-43-605, and thereby applies only to conduct that has not been prosecuted, and not, as here, conduct that ended in two convictions.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.