Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 19-1115 (2026)

Refusal to give incriminating evidence — Compelling to answer or produce evidence — Immunity — Perjury.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Refusal to give incriminating evidence — Compelling to answer or produce evidence — Immunity — Perjury.

In any criminal proceeding or in any investigation or proceeding before a grand jury in connection with any criminal offense, if a person refuses to answer a question or produce evidence of any other kind on the ground that he may be incriminated thereby, and if the prosecuting attorney of the county in writing requests the district court in and for that county to order that person to answer the question or produce the evidence, a judge of the district court shall set a time for hearing and order the person to appear before the court and show cause, if any, why the question should not be answered or the evidence produced, and the court shall order the question answered or the evidence produced unless it finds that to do so would be clearly contrary to the public interest, or could subject the witness to a criminal prosecution in another jurisdiction, and that person shall comply with the order. After complying, and if, but for this section, he would have been privileged to withhold the answer given or the evidence produced by him, the answer given, or evidence produced, and any information directly or indirectly derived from the answer or evidence, may not be used against the compelled person in any manner in a criminal case, except that he may nevertheless be prosecuted or subjected to penalty or forfeiture for any perjury, false swearing or contempt committed in answering, or failing to answer, or in producing, or failing to produce, evidence in accordance with the order.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1974–1998 · leading case: Dutton v. Dist. Court of Third Jud. Dist. Ex Rel. Cnty. of Owyhee, 518 P.2d 1182 (Idaho 1974).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dutton v. Dist. Court of Third Jud. Dist. Ex Rel. Cnty. of Owyhee, 518 P.2d 1182 (Idaho 1974). · cites it 10× “The issue before this Court is the constitutionality of I.C. § 19-1115, 1 pursuant to *721 which a citizen may be granted immunity from prosecution and ordered to testify as to any knowledge he possesses concerning alleged crimes.”

State v. Pecor, 972 P.2d 737 (Idaho Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “The language of the statute is entirely permissive in that it allows the prosecutor to form such an agreement; it does not require that the prosecutor enter such an agreement every time he or she is a party to a plea agreement with a defendant who may become a witness in another…”

State v. Lankford, 775 P.2d 593 (Idaho 1989). · cites it 4× “Accordingly, since the testimony Lankford gave at the hearing on his co-defendant brother's motion for new trial involved the same transaction and the same matters which he voluntarily testified about in his own defense on his own case, there was no fifth amendment immunity…”

Commonwealth v. Swinehart, 664 A.2d 957 (Pa. 1995). “2d 1182 (1974), referring to Idaho Code § 19-1115 ; People v. Fitzgerald, 66 Ill.”

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.