18 U.S.C. § 2514
Repealed. Pub. L. 91–452, title II, § 227(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 930]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71
cases, 1969–2013 · leading case: United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974).
United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974). “The Government then requested the District Court to grant Calandra transactional immunity pursuant to 18 U. S. C. § 2514 . Calandra requested and received a postponement of the hearing on the Government's application for the immunity order so that he could prepare a motion to…”
In the Matter of Patricia Grumbles & Donald Bruce Grumbles, 453 F.2d 119 (3rd Cir. 1971). “1 After the Grumbles refused to answer questions before the grand jury, the United States Attorney applied to the district court for a grant of immunity from prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . 2 An immunity hearing was held in the district court on November 17, 1971.”
Sherrie Bursey & Brenda Joyce Presley v. United States, 466 F.2d 1059 (9th Cir. 1972). “On March 4, 1970, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of California filed applications requesting that Bursey and Presley be granted immunity pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2514 and be ordered to testify to matters being investigated by the grand jury.”
Gelbard v. United States, 408 U.S. 41 (1972). “Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. § 2514 , both respondents were granted transactional immunity in return for their testimony.”
United States v. Russell Weiss, 599 F.2d 730 (5th Cir. 1979). “18 U.S.C. §§ 2514 , 6001, 6002. In this case, however, there is no evidence or contention that there was a formal grant of immunity to Weiss in return for evidence concerning the Atlanta nightclub industry.”
In Re Shead, 302 F. Supp. 560 (N.D. Cal. 1969). “The United States Attorney for the Northern District of California has now moved this Court to order the witnesses to answer such questions pursuant to the immunity provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . In answer to the motion, the witnesses have filed a cross-motion seeking…”
In the Matter of Grand Jury Witness, Anthony Russo, Jr. Anthony Russo, Jr. v. United States, 448 F.2d 369 (9th Cir. 1971). “§ 1826, after being granted immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . Russo raises procedural questions allegedly invalidating the judgment, and also contends that subsequent to the refusal to answer, the grand jury has in-dieted one Ellsberg, who was the subject of most of the…”
In the Matter of the Grand Jury & Susan Marie Parker, 411 F.2d 1067 (10th Cir. 1969). “Upon such refusal the government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2514 1 petitioned the district court for an order granting her immunity and instructing her to respond.”
In Re Robert Reginald Kilgo, 484 F.2d 1215 (4th Cir. 1973). “A similar interpretation has been given to the public interest provision of 18 U.S.C. § 2514 [Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968].”
In the Matter of Zoia Horn, 458 F.2d 468 (3rd Cir. 1972). “, after having been *469 granted immunity from prosecution in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . 1 In January of 1971 Mrs.”
Nicolo Licata v. United States, 429 F.2d 1177 (9th Cir. 1970). “KOELSCH, Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court adjudging Nicolo Licata guilty of contempt for refusing to answer questions before a Federal Grand Jury after he had been granted immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . When Licata initially…”
In Re Baldinger, 356 F. Supp. 153 (C.D. Cal. 1973). “The government applied to the court to grant her transactional immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 2514 . 8. The government then withdrew that application and petitioned for a grant of use immunity pursuant to 18 U.”
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.