Whether the grant of use and derivative use immunity to a defense witness cured the government's misconduct when the case agent threatened the defense witness that she would be committing perjury if she testified favorably for the defendant

QUESTION PRESENTED Petitioner Robert Ricks was convicted at trial of conspiracy to distribute cocaine base, possession with intent to distribute cocaine base and heroin, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and being a previouslyconvicted felon in possession of a firearm. Petitioner’s defense at trial was that the drugs and gun recovered from the room he shared with his girlfriend in her parents’ house belonged to his girlfriend, Mandi Malbroue, who had multiple prior drug trafficking convictions herself. Defense counsel interviewed Ms. Malbroue before trial. She admitted that the gun and drugs were hers but was unwilling to testify at trial because the case agent on Petitioner’s case had threatened her with prosecution for perjury if she were to testify. In response to a motion to quash the indictment for substantially interfering with Petitioner’s Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights to call witnesses and present a defense, the government filed a motion to grant Ms. Malbroue use and derivative use immunity under 18 U.S.C. 6002 and 6003. At trial, the case agent testified that if Ms. Malbroue testified, she would commit perjury. Ms. Malbroue refused to testify. This petition presents the following question: 1. Whether the grant of use and derivative use immunity to a defense witness, which specifically excluded any “prosecution for perjury, giving a false statement, or failing to comply with this Order,” cured the government’s misconduct when the case agent threatened the defense witness that she would be committing perjury if she testified favorably for the defendant. i