U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART V— IMMUNITY OF WITNESSES › Chapter CHAPTER 601— IMMUNITY OF WITNESSES

18 U.S.C. § 6003

Court and grand jury proceedings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) In the case of any individual who has been or may be called to testify or provide other information at any proceeding before or ancillary to a court of the United States or a grand jury of the United States, the United States district court for the judicial district in which the proceeding is or may be held shall issue, in accordance with subsection (b) of this section, upon the request of the United States attorney for such district, an order requiring such individual to give testimony or provide other information which he refuses to give or provide on the basis of his privilege against self-incrimination, such order to become effective as provided in section 6002 of this title.(b) A United States attorney may, with the approval of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any designated Assistant Attorney General or Deputy Assistant Attorney General, request an order under subsection (a) of this section when in his judgment—(1) the testimony or other information from such individual may be necessary to the public interest; and(2) such individual has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the basis of his privilege against self-incrimination.(Added Pub. L. 91–452, title II, § 201(a), Oct. 15, 1970, 84 Stat. 927; amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7020(e), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330013(4), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2146.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “title” for “part” before period at end.

1988—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 100–690 inserted “, the Associate Attorney General” after “Deputy Attorney General”, and “or Deputy Assistant Attorney General” after “Assistant Attorney General”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 244 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: United States v. Moore, 651 F.3d 30 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Moore, 651 F.3d 30 (D.C. Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “Smith claims that the district court should have told the government to immunize Ward for purposes of testifying, and if the government refused, dismissed the charges against Smith.”
State v. Rice, Nero, Miller White & Goodson v. State, 136 A.3d 720 (Md. 2016). · cites it 3× “18 U.S.C. § 6003 (2012) is procedurally identical to § 9-123.”
United States v. Sells Eng'g, Inc., 463 U.S. 418 (1983). · cites it 2× “, 18 U. S. C. § 6003 (United States Attorney to request order granting use immunity).”
United States v. William R. Hooks, 848 F.2d 785 (7th Cir. 1988). · cites it 3× “Hooks, the prosecutor responded that it did not intend to offer immunity to them because it was not “in the best interest of justice.”
United States v. Howard Taylor, 728 F.2d 930 (7th Cir. 1984). · cites it 4× “18 U.S.C. § 6003 (1982). In exercising this authority, the executive must balance “the public need for the particular testimony or documentary information in question against the social cost of granting immunity and thereby precluding the possibility of criminally prosecuting an…”
United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000). · cites it 2× “Thereafter, the prosecutor produced an order, which had previously been obtained from the District Court pursuant to 18 U. S. C. § 6003 (a), [3] directing him to respond to the subpoena and granting him immunity "to the extent allowed by law.”
United States v. Samuel D. Wright, 588 F.2d 31 (2d Cir. 1979). · cites it 4× “At that point, the prosecutor informed the court that he did not intend to seek a grant of use immunity for Parker because he did not believe such a grant to be “in the public interest” as required by 18 U.S.C. § 6003 (b)(1). 4 On the following day, however, the prosecutor…”
United States v. Charles W. Ramsey, 165 F.3d 980 (D.C. Cir. 1999). · cites it 3× “For instance, 18 U.S.C. § 6003 , a provision of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, authorizes a United States Attorney, with the approval of the Attorney General or certain other federal officials, to seek a court order granting immunity to a witness whose testimony he…”
United States v. Donald Phillip Lenz, 616 F.2d 960 (6th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “Lenz asked the United States Attorney to request use immunity for Mooneyham pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6003 , 1 but the request was refused.”
United States v. Philip Hollinger, 553 F.2d 535 (7th Cir. 1977). · cites it 3× “In the charge, the trial judge read the relevant portions of 18 U.S.C. § 6003 in order that the jury might understand the circumstances under which grants of immunity are made.”
United States v. Serrano, 406 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “Defendant also made a motion for the district court to grant Michael Serrano and Manuel Franco use immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6003 . The district court denied the motion.”
United States v. Stephen Hathaway, United States of Am. v. Howard Baptista, 534 F.2d 386 (1st Cir. 1976). · cites it 2× “Graham, testifying under a grant of immunity, 18 U.S.C. § 6003 , was the Government’s chief witness.”
Show all 244 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 6003(a) — 1 case
In Re Butcher, 38 B.R. 785 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1984).
— 18 U.S.C. § 6003(b) — 1 case
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings, Grand Jury No. 87-4, Empaneled September 9, 1987 (Two Cases). United States of Am. v. (Under Seal), (Two Cases), 856 F.2d 685 (4th Cir. 1988).
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.