Florida Statute 914.4 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS

Chapter 914
WITNESSES; CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 914.04

914.04 Witnesses; person not excused from testifying or producing evidence in certain prosecutions on ground testimony might incriminate him or her; use of testimony given or evidence produced.—No person who has been duly served with a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum shall be excused from attending and testifying or producing any book, paper, or other document before any court having felony trial jurisdiction, grand jury, or state attorney upon investigation, proceeding, or trial for a violation of any of the criminal statutes of this state upon the ground or for the reason that the testimony or evidence, documentary or otherwise, required of the person may tend to convict him or her of a crime or to subject him or her to a penalty or forfeiture, but no testimony so given or evidence so produced shall be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding. Such testimony or evidence, however, may be received against the person upon any criminal investigation or proceeding for perjury committed while giving such testimony or producing such evidence or for any perjury subsequently committed.

History.—s. 1, ch. 5400, 1905; s. 1, ch. 7850, 1919; RGS 6017; CGL 8311; s. 1, ch. 69-316; s. 97, ch. 70-339; s. 1, ch. 71-99; s. 36, ch. 73-334; s. 1, ch. 82-393; s. 175, ch. 83-216; s. 1, ch. 85-41; s. 1522, ch. 97-102.

Note.—Former s. 932.29.

F.S. 914.04 on Google Scholar

F.S. 914.04 on CourtListener

Amendments to 914.04

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 914.04

Total Results: 107

Johnston v. State

497 So. 2d 863, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 585

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1986 | Docket: 1264315

Cited 74 times | Published

court erred in denying his motion to enforce section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983), and his motion in

Dennis v. State

51 So. 3d 456, 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 731, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 2115, 2010 WL 5110231

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2010 | Docket: 157379

Cited 46 times | Published

transactional immunity or use immunity provisions of section 914.04, Florida Statutes, were applicable); Owen v

United States v. Bryant L. Hampton

775 F.2d 1479, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 24021

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Nov 13, 1985 | Docket: 503572

Cited 35 times | Published

immunity from state prosecution. See § 914.04, Florida Statutes. This testimony was stenographically

McDonald v. State

321 So. 2d 453

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 7, 1975 | Docket: 1256552

Cited 25 times | Published

it was thereby immunizing appellant pursuant to § 914.04, F.S. 1973. Several more questions were propounded

Kaplan v. State

451 So. 2d 1386

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 13, 1984 | Docket: 1741092

Cited 18 times | Published

Supreme Court of Florida reminds us (referring to F.S. 914.04) of the principles governing statutory construction:

Tsavaris v. Scruggs

360 So. 2d 745

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1977 | Docket: 224106

Cited 17 times | Published

raises questions under the immunity statute, Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975).[1] Dr. *747 Tsavaris

Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdale

427 So. 2d 187, 1983 Fla. LEXIS 2294

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 1983 | Docket: 1151326

Cited 16 times | Published

order as being of great importance: 1) Does Section 914.04 of the Florida Statutes and the Supreme Court's

McKenney v. State

388 So. 2d 1232

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 1980 | Docket: 419632

Cited 16 times | Published

from a state attorney or other authorized person. § 914.04-.05, Fla. Stat. (1977). Inasmuch as we find defendant's

DeBock v. State

512 So. 2d 164, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 404

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 1987 | Docket: 473319

Cited 14 times | Published

contending that the immunity flowing from section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983), was insufficient

Jenny v. State

447 So. 2d 1351

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 8, 1984 | Docket: 1312066

Cited 11 times | Published

The district court reversed, finding that section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979) did not confer immunity

Lee v. State

318 So. 2d 431

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 1975 | Docket: 1476945

Cited 10 times | Published

testifies against him, and the Immunity Statute, F.S. 914.04, wherein a person who testifies concerning matters

State v. Tsavaris

382 So. 2d 56

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 1980 | Docket: 1255198

Cited 9 times | Published

prosecution for the murder of Sally Burton under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979) by reason of his secretary's

Ciravolo v. the Florida Bar

361 So. 2d 121

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1978 | Docket: 1685832

Cited 9 times | Published

attorney, following a grant of immunity under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), may be used against

State v. Yatman

320 So. 2d 401

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 1975 | Docket: 1409088

Cited 9 times | Published

importantly with the waiver of immunity statute, § 914.04 F.S. 1973. The effect of our holding is that if

Lurie v. Florida State Board of Dentistry

288 So. 2d 223, 1973 Fla. LEXIS 3987

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 10, 1973 | Docket: 1326261

Cited 9 times | Published

the immunity statute, formerly 932.29 and now Section 914.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., not only on the

State v. Dawson

290 So. 2d 79

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 1974 | Docket: 1510344

Cited 8 times | Published

that Dawson was immune from prosecution under § 914.04, Florida Statutes,[4] and forever abated any further

State Ex Rel. Hough v. Popper

287 So. 2d 282

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 1973 | Docket: 1170293

Cited 7 times | Published

of the mentioned testimony and pursuant to F.S. § 914.04, F.S.A. This section provides: "No person, having

Compton v. Societe Eurosuisse, S.A.

494 F. Supp. 836, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14697

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 1980 | Docket: 2019305

Cited 6 times | Published

general immunity statute in Florida, Fla.Stat. § 914.04, goes beyond the protection afforded by the Fifth

Salem v. State

305 So. 2d 23

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 3, 1974 | Docket: 457155

Cited 6 times | Published

immunity from criminal prosecution pursuant to Florida Statute 914.04, and advised by the trial judge that he

Joseph v. State

103 So. 3d 227, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21415, 2012 WL 6166382

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2012 | Docket: 60227012

Cited 5 times | Published

prosecution under the investigative subpoena statute—section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975). (T)he appropriate

Joseph v. State

103 So. 3d 227, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21415, 2012 WL 6166382

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2012 | Docket: 60227012

Cited 5 times | Published

prosecution under the investigative subpoena statute—section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975). (T)he appropriate

State v. Montgomery

467 So. 2d 387, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 853

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1985 | Docket: 1275449

Cited 5 times | Published

State v. Schell, 222 So.2d 757 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); § 914.04, Fla. Stat. (1983). The problem arises when the

King v. State

353 So. 2d 180

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 1977 | Docket: 447928

Cited 5 times | Published

testified, he would have had immunity under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975). We do not consider

Orosz v. State

334 So. 2d 26

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 1976 | Docket: 1712407

Cited 5 times | Published

immunity pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statute 914.04.[2] The *28 gist of Orosz's contention

Hill v. State

330 So. 2d 487

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1976 | Docket: 1774451

Cited 5 times | Published

McDonald about the incident in question pursuant to § 914.04 F.S. 1973, thereby granting him use immunity.

Fountaine v. State

460 So. 2d 553

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 1984 | Docket: 1766943

Cited 4 times | Published

Florida's use immunity statute, which is found in section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983). That section states:

Novo v. Scott

438 So. 2d 477

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 26, 1983 | Docket: 1731634

Cited 4 times | Published

Novo that he would extend immunity pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1982). Despite this

Celeste Chambers v. State of Florida

200 So. 3d 242, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14744, 2016 WL 5746641

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 2016 | Docket: 4468680

Cited 3 times | Published

been subject to use immunity. See § 914.04, Fla. Stat. (2015); Perez v. State,

Grant v. State

832 So. 2d 770, 2002 WL 464697

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2002 | Docket: 1336056

Cited 3 times | Published

Rachel's. Despite the OSP's assertion that section 914.04, Florida Statutes (2001), conferred use and

Zile v. State

710 So. 2d 729, 1998 WL 250710

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 20, 1998 | Docket: 1444852

Cited 3 times | Published

State, 512 So.2d 164 (Fla.1987). Florida Statutes § 914.04 previously provided for transactional immunity

State v. Harris

425 So. 2d 118

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 1982 | Docket: 1182124

Cited 3 times | Published

order will by virtue of the immunity statute, § 914.04, Fla. Stat. (1979), automatically receive transactional

Agrella v. Rivkind

404 So. 2d 1113

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 1981 | Docket: 1782239

Cited 3 times | Published

given transactional immunity *1114 pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979); (c) that despite

City of Hollywood v. Washington

384 So. 2d 1315

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 22, 1980 | Docket: 1678664

Cited 3 times | Published

932.29, Florida Statutes (1967), renumbered Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1971), prohibits use of

State v. Weir

380 So. 2d 1297

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1980 | Docket: 1402873

Cited 3 times | Published

these facts, Weir was immunized by the effect of § 914.04. That statute provides No person, having been

The Florida Bar v. Pearce

356 So. 2d 317, 1978 Fla. LEXIS 4701

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 23, 1978 | Docket: 1739822

Cited 3 times | Published

to abate, Pearce says that the provisions of Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975) grant him immunity

Jared Bretherick v. State of Florida

170 So. 3d 766, 40 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 411, 2015 WL 4112414, 2015 Fla. LEXIS 1470

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 2015 | Docket: 2672540

Cited 2 times | Published

(involving statutory transactional immunity under, section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975)). When a defendant

Govoni v. State

17 So. 3d 809, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 14919, 2009 WL 2516939

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 7, 2009 | Docket: 1645486

Cited 2 times | Published

(involving statutory transactional immunity under section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975)). When a defendant

State v. Williams

487 So. 2d 1092, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 695

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 1986 | Docket: 1797439

Cited 2 times | Published

court's reasoning. Before its amendment in 1982, Section 914.04, Florida Statutes, contained a provision, stating:

State v. Rendina

467 So. 2d 734, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 805

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1985 | Docket: 1680371

Cited 2 times | Published

contended that the immunization flowing from section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983), was insufficient

State v. Fowler

466 So. 2d 210, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 104

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 1985 | Docket: 1524917

Cited 2 times | Published

ex-husband. After being granted immunity pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1981),[1] she implicated

In Re Getty

427 So. 2d 380

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1983 | Docket: 1739663

Cited 2 times | Published

transactional and use immunity[3] pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979), which says: 914.04

The Florida Bar v. Doe

384 So. 2d 30

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 15, 1980 | Docket: 1678559

Cited 2 times | Published

1978), because a state attorney, pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1973),[2] had purported

State v. Powell

343 So. 2d 892

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 1977 | Docket: 1304362

Cited 2 times | Published

and appellees have argued the applicability of § 914.04, Fla. Stat. 1973, the general immunity statute

State v. Deems

334 So. 2d 829

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1976 | Docket: 97452

Cited 2 times | Published

subpoena, he was immunized from prosecution under § 914.04, Fla. Stat., which provides: "No person, having

State v. Mitrani

19 So. 3d 1065, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 14717, 2009 WL 3149384

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 2009 | Docket: 60254561

Cited 1 times | Published

*1067and derivative use immunity as provided in section 914.04, Florida Statutes (2008).1 The State then filed

Costello v. Fennelly

681 So. 2d 926, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11208, 1996 WL 625636

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 1996 | Docket: 64768499

Cited 1 times | Published

27.04, Florida Statutes (1995). Pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1995), she was accorded

Randall v. Guenther

650 So. 2d 1070, 1995 WL 63056

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 1995 | Docket: 1703273

Cited 1 times | Published

Randall use and derivative use immunity under section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1993), in connection with

Meek v. State

566 So. 2d 1318, 1990 WL 111927

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 1990 | Docket: 547979

Cited 1 times | Published

transactional immunity is of a fundamental nature. Section 914.04, the immunity statute controlling, provided:

State v. McSwain

440 So. 2d 502, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24126

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 9, 1983 | Docket: 64600617

Cited 1 times | Published

testimony after an offer of immunity pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1982).1 The respondent had

State Ex Rel. D'Amato v. Morphonios

358 So. 2d 1119

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 1978 | Docket: 2537807

Cited 1 times | Published

can acquire immunity from prosecution under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), based on testimony

State v. Kitchen

353 So. 2d 897, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17263

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 1977 | Docket: 64562107

Cited 1 times | Published

claiming transactional immunity pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statute (1975). The trial court found

State v. Newsome

349 So. 2d 771

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 1977 | Docket: 1225564

Cited 1 times | Published

either transactional or use immunity under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), the witness must

STATE, OFFICE OF STATE ATTY. FOR 20TH JC v. Sievert

312 So. 2d 788

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 14, 1975 | Docket: 1412398

Cited 1 times | Published

and was granted immunity pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 914.04. Thereafter, Loretta Sievert was arrested and

The State of Florida v. Kevin Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 2025 | Docket: 69612571

Published

offense to which the question relates.”). See also § 914.04, Fla. Stat. (2023) (“No person who has been duly

State of Florida v. Mark A. Desimone

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2024 | Docket: 68043000

Published

transactional immunity or use immunity provisions of section 914.04, Florida Statutes, were applicable); Owen v

State of Florida v. Mark A. Desimone

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2024 | Docket: 68043000

Published

transactional immunity or use immunity provisions of section 914.04, Florida Statutes, were applicable); Owen v

Gardner v. State

194 So. 3d 385, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 4443, 2016 WL 1123681

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 2016 | Docket: 3049208

Published

the State had subpoenaed her. • See § 914.04,Stat. (2012). But the State made clear that it

State v. Belidor

96 So. 3d 993, 2012 WL 3705095

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 2012 | Docket: 60311620

Published

departs from the essential requirements of section 914.04, Florida Statutes (2012), which subjects the

Jones v. State

54 So. 3d 589, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1927, 2011 WL 520543

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 2011 | Docket: 60298339

Published

grant Jones immunity for his testimony. While section 914.04, Florida Statutes (2010) (providing immunity

McKay v. Great American Insurance Co.

876 So. 2d 666, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8803, 2004 WL 1392287

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2004 | Docket: 64831365

Published

section in any venue is given pursuant to F.S. Section 914.04 as set forth herein. Nothing in this section

State v. Polnac

665 So. 2d 1095, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 20, 1996 WL 1101

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 3, 1996 | Docket: 64761201

Published

criminal prosecution under Florida Statute, Section 914.04. The trial court, however, incorrectly relied

Meek v. State

636 So. 2d 543, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 3728, 1994 WL 138131

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 1994 | Docket: 64748226

Published

resulting cloak of transactional immunity. Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979) provided: Witnesses;

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Feb 16, 1994 | Docket: 3255444

Published

State, 168 So.2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). 12 Section 914.04, Fla. Stat. 1993. 13 See, Salem v. State, 310

Sarrain v. State

632 So. 2d 1063, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 972, 1994 WL 45055

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 15, 1994 | Docket: 64746727

Published

probation in view of the immunity statutes. See § 914.04, Fla.Stat. (1993); § 837.021, Fla.Stat. (1993)

Intelligence Group, Inc. v. Department of State, Division of Licensing

610 So. 2d 589, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12414, 1992 WL 362140

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 1992 | Docket: 64692821

Published

was granted immunity from prosecution under section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1987), for his dealings

Meek v. State

605 So. 2d 1301, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10360, 1992 WL 259793

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 7, 1992 | Docket: 64670496

Published

the first time, that upon the authority of section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979), he had *1302transactional

Valdez v. State

555 So. 2d 1311, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 493, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 253

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 1990 | Docket: 64647725

Published

limited immunity for her testimony by virtue of Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1987). Notwithstanding this

State v. Moore

486 So. 2d 79, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 871, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7240

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 9, 1986 | Docket: 64618429

Published

Ap-pellees were granted use immunity pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983), by virtue of their

Baker v. State

480 So. 2d 659, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2574, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16989

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 1985 | Docket: 64616380

Published

cannot be prosecuted for the perjurious lies. § 914.04, Fla.Stat. (1983); State v. Fowler, 447 So.2d

State v. Moorman

475 So. 2d 312, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2188, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15913

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 1985 | Docket: 64614097

Published

was the immunity shield conferred upon him by section 914.04, Florida Statutes, as it existed at that time

Putnal v. State

468 So. 2d 444, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1125, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13844

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 1985 | Docket: 64611773

Published

protected by the “use immunity” guaranteed by section 914.04, Florida Statutes, whenever one testifies pursuant

State v. Richards

457 So. 2d 1124, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2204, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15561

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 1984 | Docket: 64607521

Published

indisputably had been given use immunity pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1983), to testify at the

Perez v. State

453 So. 2d 173, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 14101

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 20, 1984 | Docket: 64606037

Published

duly served with a trial subpoena by the state. § 914.-04, Fla.Stat. (1983). Under these circumstances this

Menut v. State

446 So. 2d 718, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12180

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 1984 | Docket: 64603423

Published

Appellant argues first that the immunity defined in Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982), is not coextensive

Fowler v. State

447 So. 2d 296, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11300

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 13, 1984 | Docket: 64603680

Published

investigation, Fowler was granted immunity pursuant to section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1981). She gave sworn incriminating

State v. Harrison

442 So. 2d 389, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25116

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 1983 | Docket: 64601531

Published

quash the trial court’s order which held that section 914.04, Florida Statutes (Supp.1982) is unconstitutional

Schaffer v. State

429 So. 2d 372, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18861

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 1983 | Docket: 64596269

Published

granted transactional immunity pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1981). He contends that

State v. Jenny

424 So. 2d 142, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22230

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 29, 1982 | Docket: 64594391

Published

pursuant to subpoena, was entitled, by virtue of Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979),1 to immunity as to

State v. Daniels

400 So. 2d 498, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19945

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 27, 1981 | Docket: 64583574

Published

him to answer pursuant to section 27.04 or section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979), and thereby to grant

Town v. Reno

395 So. 2d 602, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 18999

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 1981 | Docket: 64581146

Published

of the criminal statutes of this state,” see Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979); State ex rel. D’Amato

Miller v. State

389 So. 2d 1210, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18001

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 22, 1980 | Docket: 64578718

Published

statutory immunity in exchange for his agreement. Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979). There was nothing

Cook v. State

381 So. 2d 1368, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4183

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1980 | Docket: 64575441

Published

information on the basis of statutory immunity. § 914.04, Fla.Stat. (1975). When this motion was denied

D'Amato v. Morphonios

381 So. 2d 1355, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4175

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1980 | Docket: 64575439

Published

the operation of Florida’s immunity statute, section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), based on testimony

D'Amato v. Morphonios

381 So. 2d 1355, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4175

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 1980 | Docket: 64575439

Published

the operation of Florida’s immunity statute, section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), based on testimony

Alford v. Cornelius

380 So. 2d 1183, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 15684

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 12, 1980 | Docket: 64574860

Published

given immunity from prosecution pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1979). The transcript of

Daniels v. Kirkland

379 So. 2d 197, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 15499

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 30, 1980 | Docket: 64574048

Published

of Prohibition which raises questions under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1977). Robin Lee Daniels

Metropolitan Dade County v. Mandelkern

372 So. 2d 204, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15333

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 26, 1979 | Docket: 64570793

Published

afforded full immunity under Florida Statute, Section 914.04 by the State Attorney’s Office for testimony

State v. Brodski

369 So. 2d 366, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14701

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 1979 | Docket: 64569462

Published

criminal prosecution pursuant to the provisions of Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1977). In response to these

Yarbrough v. Pfeiffer

370 So. 2d 1177, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14064

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 1979 | Docket: 64570181

Published

contends that he is entitled to immunity under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), which provides: No

Melanson v. Nelson

366 So. 2d 1191, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 13950

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 4, 1979 | Docket: 64568325

Published

tecum he gained immunity from prosecution under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1977). The circuit court

State v. Soto

365 So. 2d 189, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 22539

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 1978 | Docket: 64567481

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See: Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1977).

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Mar 16, 1978 | Docket: 3258676

Published

state criminal prosecution may be granted. Section 914.04 provides: No person, having been duly

Gerardo v. State

355 So. 2d 1221, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15452

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 1978 | Docket: 64563250

Published

had been immunized from prosecution through Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975), and the applicable

Anson v. Florida State Board of Architecture

354 So. 2d 386, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 17290

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 19, 1977 | Docket: 64562480

Published

Subsequent to being granted immunity pursuant to Section 914.-04, Florida Statutes, Anson gave testimony concerning

State v. Toogood

349 So. 2d 1203, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16397

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1977 | Docket: 64560271

Published

the indictments must be dismissed pursuant to F.S. 914.04, F.S.A.; if, however, the indictments do not

State v. Perkins

349 So. 2d 802

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 9, 1977 | Docket: 1655201

Published

disagree and reverse. The immunity statute, Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975)[1] is not self-executing

State ex rel. Key v. Fogle

347 So. 2d 1067, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15894

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 29, 1977 | Docket: 64559467

Published

received transactional immunity pursuant to Section 914.04, Florida Statutes (1975). The motion was denied

Holland v. State

345 So. 2d 802, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15450

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 1977 | Docket: 64558455

Published

any criminal investigation or proceeding. Florida Statute 914.04 (1975). During the course of the deposition

Thomas v. State

342 So. 2d 978, 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 15350

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1977 | Docket: 64557274

Published

granted immunity pursuant to the operation of § 914.04, Fla.Stat.1975. Following an evidentiary hearing

Woodsmall v. State

334 So. 2d 320, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15717

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 30, 1976 | Docket: 64554334

Published

identification during the trial he was immunized under Section 914.04, Florida Statutes. We do not agree. Woodsmall

State v. Hough

332 So. 2d 98, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14386

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 1976 | Docket: 64553677

Published

from prosecution on these charges pursuant to § 914.-04, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.1 The trial judge in June 1973

Lawley v. State

330 So. 2d 784, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15082

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 1976 | Docket: 64553445

Published

suppression of evidence by the state. Also, under § 914.04, Florida Statutes, the state can grant immunity

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Jul 18, 1975 | Docket: 3256591

Published

the questions presented is in the negative. Section 914.04, F.S., provides:914.04 Witnesses; person not

State v. Montgomery

310 So. 2d 440, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14053

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 8, 1975 | Docket: 64545415

Published

the defendant was immune from prosecution under § 914.04, Fla.Stat. We reverse. The defendant moved to

Salem v. State

310 So. 2d 408, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14024

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 11, 1975 | Docket: 64545392

Published

immunity granted to him by the State under Fla.Stat. § 914.04, F.S.A. Appellant relies upon the Florida Supreme

Consolidated-Tomoka Land Co. v. Butz

353 F. Supp. 683, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11553

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 1972 | Docket: 66083374

Published

Temple, Murcott Honey and King oranges.” 7 C.F.R. § 914.4.17 Thus, it would appear, initially, that the commodity

Nancy Gilliam v. State

267 So. 2d 658, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6161

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 6, 1972 | Docket: 64528041

Published

they had been granted immunity under Fla.Stat. § 914.04 (1971), F.S.A. We granted them bail pending appeal