Whether the petitioner's rights to due process of law, compulsory process and fair trial were violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the petitioner’s rights to due process of law, compulsory process and fair trial were violated, and whether the petitioner should be required to meet the prosecutorial misconduct standard in order for immunity to extend to potential defense witnesses’ testimony, or oblige the court to strike the witnesses’ prior testimony: (a) where the prosecution midtrial and without cause, unlawfully revoked the statutory immunity it previously had granted to the three core prosecution witnesses (the two co-defendants and a critical misconduct witness), after the conclusion of the prosecution’s case-in-chief, and (b) where, at the behest of the prosecutor, the trial court advised the witnesses when they were called by the petitioner that they had no immunity if they testified for the defense, then the trial court failed to rule on the availability of privilege, and permitted those key witnesses invalidly to invoke the privilege against selfincrimination as to relevant, material and exculpatory matters