Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 35-7-1043 (2026)

Immunity from prosecution.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

All duly authorized peace officers including any special agents
or other personnel appointed by the commissioner, and probation
and parole agents as defined in W.S. 7-13-401, while
investigating violations of this act in performance of their
official duties, shall be immune from prosecution under this
act. Any person working under the immediate direction,
supervision or instruction of a duly authorized peace officer,
special agent or other person appointed by the commissioner, may
be granted immunity from prosecution under this act by the
commissioner. In addition to the foregoing persons, such
immunity may also be granted to any person whose testimony is
necessary to secure a conviction under this act with the consent
of district judge in the district wherein prosecution is to take
place. Any person granted immunity under this section shall not
be excused from testifying or producing evidence on the ground
that the testimony or evidence required of him may tend to
incriminate him or subject him to penalty or forfeiture. Any
person who except for the provisions of this act, would have
been privileged to withhold the testimony given or the evidence
produced by him shall not be prosecuted, subjected to any
penalty, forfeiture, for or on account of any transaction,
matter or thing concerning which, by reason of said immunity, he
gave testimony and produced evidence; and no such testimony
given or evidence produced shall be received against him in any
criminal proceeding. Provided, no person given immunity under
this section shall be exempt from prosecution for perjury or
contempt committed while giving testimony or producing evidence
under compulsion as provided in this section.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1987–1993 · leading case: Hennigan v. State, 746 P.2d 360 (Wyo. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hennigan v. State, 746 P.2d 360 (Wyo. 1987). · cites it 8× “Any person who except for the provisions of this act, would have been privileged to withhold the testimony given or the evidence produced by him shall not be prosecuted, subjected to any penalty, forfeiture, for or on account of any transaction, matter or thing concerning which,…”

Russell v. State, 851 P.2d 1274 (Wyo. 1993). · cites it 4× “, Wyo. Stat. §§ 35-7-1043 (1988), 14-2-108 (Supp.”

Hall v. State, 851 P.2d 1262 (Wyo. 1993). · cites it 4× “Wyo.Stat. § 35-7-1043 (1988) permits the attorney general, in his role as commissioner of drugs and substances control, to extend immunity to law enforcement personnel investigating crimes prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act.”

Gale v. State, 792 P.2d 570 (Wyo. 1990). “W.S. 35-7-1043. . Directly converse positions which consider the fair trial and due process rights of the accused against rights of privacy are noted in Comment, Psychiatric Testimony for the Impeachment of Witnesses in Sex Cases, 39 J.”

Rivera v. State, 846 P.2d 1 (Wyo. 1993). “W.S. 35-7-1043 (1988). Appellant, however, contends that the immunity provisions of this statute did not apply here because there was no pre-exist-ing “violation” to investigate when the police obtained and sold the marijuana.”

Jaramillo v. State, 802 P.2d 872 (Wyo. 1990). · cites it 5× “Do you have any questions about the immunity?" Section 35-7-1043, W.S. 1977 (June 1988 Repl.”

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.