Source: https://de.scribd.com/document/320063957/Gary-Thomas-Rowe-v-Carl-Griffin-Etc-Hon-Jesse-O-Bryan-676-F-2d-524-11th-Cir-1982
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 23:27:50+00:00

Document:
Hon. Jesse O. Bryan, Defendant-Appellant.
John A. Taber, John S. Andrews, Greenville, Ala., for Bryan.
Before THORNBERRY* , FAY and HATCHETT, Circuit Judges.
seventeen years ago during the Selma to Montgomery Civil Rights March. Mrs.
new identity by the FBI.
test results indicated to Bryan that Rowe had fired the shots which killed Mrs.
which returned an indictment for murder against Rowe in September, 1978.
Prosecution of Rowe was halted by a federal injunction on October 2, 1980.
criminal prosecution, either by injunction or declaratory judgment. Younger v.
circumstances which create a threat of great, immediate, and irreparable injury.
U.S. at 49-54, 91 S.Ct. at 753; Fitzgerald v. Peek, 636 F.2d 943, 944 (5th Cir.
from prosecution by state prosecutors, is per se a bad faith prosecution.
literally the prosecution's entire case.
Similar promises have been considered, but not enforced, in United States v.
the interview because the prosecutor promised to dismiss the perjury charges.
Weiss was not prejudiced by his revelations. Id. at 735, 737-38.
he would later be brought to trial on the same charges.
evidence of guilt induced by a government promise of immunity is "coerced"
evidence and may not be used against the accused. Shotwell Manufacturing Co.
v. United States, 371 U.S. 341, 347, 83 S.Ct. 448, 453, 9 L.Ed.2d 950 (1963).
with the investigation or testified for the government.
U.S. 257, 262, 92 S.Ct. 495, 498, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971); United States v.
Block, 660 F.2d 1086, 1089-90 (5th Cir. 1981).
prosecutor recommended the maximum sentence. 404 U.S. at 258-59, 92 S.Ct.
Id. at 262, 92 S.Ct. at 498.
se a bad faith prosecution. Cf. Acosta v. Turner, 666 F.2d 949, 953 (5th Cir.
testimony of Coleman and Snow was incredible.
faith exception to Younger abstention.
of conduct which manifest "bad faith."
se rule as unwise and unnecessary.
whatever manner and against whomever an effort might be made to apply it."
statute, that violates the Constitution.
been to no avail, and our grant of equitable immunity would be meaningless.
inconvenience of having to defend against a single criminal prosecution."
Younger, supra, 401 U.S. at 46, 91 S.Ct. at 751.
its analysis for the foregoing reasons.
Section 1983 is an "expressly authorized" exception to the federal antiinjunction statute, 28 U.S.C. 2283. Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225, 92 S.Ct.
Wilson, 593 F.2d at 1382 n.11.
The concept of equitable immunity is not well defined. See United States v.
Weiss, 599 F.2d 730, 735 n.9 (5th Cir. 1979). In the Whiskey Cases, 99 U.S.
when the Attorney General promised immunity from prosecution. Record, Vol.
for determining whether a state criminal prosecution is improperly motivated.

References: v.

 v. 
 v.

v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.