Opinion ID: 438695
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Lirette's Testimony.

Text: 7 It is undisputed that two years prior to Mergist's trial, and shortly after the marijuana smuggling transaction that was the basis for the trial, Lirette was apprehended by the Louisiana police and was coerced into giving testimony that implicated Mergist. 1 Mergist made a pretrial motion to suppress Lirette's testimony because of this coercion. The trial court reviewed the tape and transcript of Lirette's interrogation and, without holding an evidentiary hearing, ruled Lirette's trial testimony admissible because, inter alia: 2 8 [T]here is no doubt that there was some severe coercion of the witnesses, and there is no doubt that the fifth amendment right of those witnesses were violated .... [T]he witnesses are not banned from testifying despite the fact that the witnesses' constitutional rights were violated. 9