Commonwealth v. Swinehart
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
664 A.2d 957 (1995)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
Patricia Swinehart and Thomas DeBlase (defendant) were charged as coconspirators in the murder of Swinehart’s husband, David. The commonwealth (plaintiff) subpoenaed DeBlase to testify at Swinehart’s trial and offered DeBlase immunity pursuant to Pennsylvania law. DeBlase moved to quash the subpoena, arguing that the statutory grant of immunity violated his constitutional privilege against compelled self-incrimination. The trial court denied DeBlase’s motion and approved the commonwealth’s grant of immunity. DeBlase refused to testify. Swinehart was acquitted. The trial court held DeBlase in both civil and criminal contempt. DeBlase appealed his contempt conviction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cappy, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.