• Last updated on November 11, 2022

The Supreme Court prohibited federal prosectors from using incriminating evidence compelled by the state, citing the privilege against self-incrimination.

Justice Arthur J. GoldbergGoldberg, Arthur J.;Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York[Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York] wrote the unanimous opinion for the Supreme Court, holding that incriminating evidence obtained under compulsion by one level of government may not be used by another in criminal prosecutions. This decision overruled Feldman v. United States[case]Feldman v. United States[Feldman v. United States] (1944) and was handed down on the same day as Malloy v. Hogan[case]Malloy v. Hogan[Malloy v. Hogan] (1964), which had applied the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination to the states. The logic of Malloy is evident in this decision. The protection against self-incrimination is not absolute, but grants of use immunity must be as broad as the original protection in the Fifth Amendment. This decision was limited by the Court’s ruling in Kastigar v. United States[case]Kastigar v. United States[Kastigar v. United States] (1972).Self-incrimination, immunity against;Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York[Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York]

Counselman v. Hitchcock

Due process, procedural

Exclusionary rule

Fifth Amendment

Fourteenth Amendment

Grand jury

Incorporation doctrine

Kastigar v. United States

Malloy v. Hogan

Self-incrimination, immunity against

Categories: History Content