TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Theodore William Dupuy, Jr. v. United States of America, in the Matter of a Witness Before the Grand Jury

Theodore William DUPUY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. in the Matter of a WITNESS BEFORE the GRAND JURY

Dupuy v. United States, in the Matter of a Witness Before the Grand Jury, 518 F.2d 1295 (9th Cir. 1975)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 11, 1975
Docket
No. 75-2135
Judges
Chambers, Wright, Sneed
Citations
518 F.2d 1295

Opinion — Per Curiam

OPINION Before CHAMBERS, WRIGHT and SNEED, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The case is submitted without oral argument.

Dupuy is a prisoner serving a state imposed sentence at the Washington state penitentiary at Walla Walla. He was brought before a federal grand jury in Seattle, where he refused to answer questions put to him on the ground of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and on the ground that his fear that his life would be endangered by his fellow prisoners if he testified constituted “just cause” under 28 U.S.C. § 1826 (a) to refuse to testify. Dupuy’s Fifth Amendment claim was disposed of when the district court granted him testimonial immunity under 18 U.S.C. § 6002 . The district court imposed a civil contempt sanction.

No federal court in a reported decision has held that fear of retaliation is sufficient reason to refuse to testify. To do so in this case would mean that virtually every prisoner in the United States, and many millions of people at large, would be freed of the duty to appear and testify before a grand jury. We choose to follow the reported decisions of those courts which have already held that fear of physical harm does not excuse a witness from testifying. United States v. Doe, 478 F.2d 194 (1st Cir. 1973); In re Kilgo, 484 F.2d 1215 (4th Cir. 1973); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 509 F.2d 1349 (5th Cir. 1975); LaTona v. United States, 449 F.2d 121 (8th Cir. 1971).

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1976: 11980: 21983: 11990: 11991: 11992: 11997: 11998: 12008: 12015: 119762026peak 1980 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Grand Jury Proceedings. Michael C. Lahey, Witness- v. United States914 F.2d 1372 (9th Cir. 1990)
  2. United States v. John Allen Powers William Nichols, Contemnor/629 F.2d 619 (9th Cir. 1980)
  3. United States v. William T612 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1980)
  4. In re Doe410 F. Supp. 1163 (E.D. Mich. 1976)
  5. In re Yoho301 S.E.2d 581 (W. Va. 1983)
  6. UNITED STATES of America v. John DOE125 F.3d 1249 (9th Cir. 1997)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
In re Robert Reginald Kilgo, 484 F.2d 1215 (4th Cir. 1973) 91
United States v. John Doe (Two Cases). Appeal of Marilyn Alperen. Appeal of Robert Alperen, 478 F.2d 194 (1st Cir. 1973) 24
Grand Jury Proceedings. Richard Stanley Taylor v. United States, 509 F.2d 1349 (5th Cir. 1975) 18
Latona v. United States, 449 F.2d 121 (8th Cir. 1971) 14

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list