rogers
argued
november
decided
february
subpoena
petitioner
appeared
federal
grand
jury
testified
without
objection
treasurer
communist
party
denver
possession
records
turned
another
person
refused
identify
person
delivered
records
giving
reason
wish
subject
another
person
going
committed
custody
marshal
next
day
advised
right
counsel
next
day
counsel
informed
advice
petitioner
answer
question
purge
contempt
upon
reappearance
grand
jury
refused
answer
question
brought
back
charged
contempt
first
time
asserted
privilege
claim
privilege
overruled
convicted
contempt
held
conviction
sustained
pp
since
privilege
solely
benefit
witness
petitioner
original
refusal
answer
justified
desire
protect
another
punishment
much
less
protect
another
interrogation
grand
jury
books
records
kept
representative
rather
personal
capacity
subject
personal
privilege
even
though
production
might
tend
incriminate
keeper
personally
pp
freely
answered
questions
relating
connection
communist
party
petitioner
refuse
answer
questions
subject
real
danger
incrimination
pp
questions
relating
activities
communist
party
incriminating
violation
smith
act
conspiracy
violate
act
blau
federal
district
petitioner
convicted
contempt
refusal
answer
questions
asked
federal
grand
jury
appeals
affirmed
granted
certiorari
affirmed
samuel
menin
argued
cause
filed
brief
petitioner
solicitor
general
perlman
argued
cause
brief
assistant
attorney
general
mcinerney
john
davis
bishop
chief
justice
vinson
delivered
opinion
case
arises
investigation
regularly
convened
grand
jury
district
district
colorado
books
records
communist
party
denver
sought
necessary
inquiry
subject
questioning
grand
jury
september
petitioner
response
subpoena
appeared
grand
jury
testified
held
position
treasurer
communist
party
denver
january
virtue
office
possession
membership
lists
dues
records
party
petitioner
denied
possession
records
testified
turned
another
refused
identify
person
given
party
books
stating
reason
feel
subject
person
persons
thing
going
thereupon
committed
petitioner
custody
marshal
ten
next
morning
expressly
advising
petitioner
right
consult
counsel
next
day
counsel
petitioner
informed
read
transcript
prior
day
proceedings
upon
advice
petitioner
answer
questions
purge
contempt
however
upon
reappearing
grand
jury
petitioner
refused
answer
question
following
day
brought
called
district
judge
immediately
heard
oral
argument
concerning
privilege
another
case
petitioner
repeated
refusal
answer
question
asserting
time
privilege
ruling
refusal
privileged
district
judge
imposed
sentence
four
months
contempt
appeals
tenth
circuit
affirmed
granted
certiorari
petitioner
desired
protection
privilege
required
claim
monia
privilege
deemed
waived
unless
invoked
murdock
furthermore
decisions
explicit
holding
privilege
solely
benefit
witness
purely
personal
privilege
witness
petitioner
expressly
placed
original
declination
answer
untenable
ground
since
refusal
answer
justified
desire
protect
others
punishment
much
less
protect
another
interrogation
grand
jury
petitioner
claim
privilege
pure
afterthought
although
claim
made
time
second
refusal
answer
presence
came
voluntarily
testified
status
officer
communist
party
denver
uphold
claim
privilege
case
open
way
distortion
facts
permitting
witness
select
stopping
place
testimony
privilege
even
claimed
time
question
name
person
petitioner
turned
party
records
asked
justify
refusal
answer
preliminary
matter
note
petitioner
privilege
respect
books
party
whether
corporation
unincorporated
association
books
records
kept
representative
rather
personal
capacity
subject
personal
privilege
even
though
production
papers
might
tend
incriminate
keeper
personally
white
since
petitioner
claim
privilege
asserted
relation
books
records
sought
grand
jury
claim
reversal
conviction
rests
ground
mere
disclosure
name
recipient
books
tends
incriminate
patricia
blau
held
questions
connections
communist
party
subject
privilege
calling
disclosure
facts
tending
criminate
smith
act
petitioner
conviction
stands
entirely
different
footing
freely
described
membership
activities
office
party
since
privilege
presupposes
real
danger
legal
detriment
arising
disclosure
petitioner
invoke
privilege
response
specific
question
issue
incriminate
disclosure
fact
waives
privilege
details
stated
brown
walker
thus
witness
elects
waive
privilege
may
doubtless
since
privilege
protection
parties
discloses
criminal
connections
permitted
stop
must
go
make
full
disclosure
witness
voluntarily
answered
materially
criminating
facts
held
uniformity
stop
short
refuse
explanation
must
disclose
fully
attempted
relate
petitioner
contention
appeals
conceding
prior
voluntary
crimination
one
element
proof
smith
act
violation
disclosure
name
recipient
party
records
tend
incriminate
different
crime
conspiracy
violate
smith
act
opinion
patricia
blau
supra
explicitly
rejects
petitioner
argument
reversal
holding
questions
relating
activities
communist
party
criminating
violation
conspiracy
violate
smith
act
course
least
two
persons
required
constitute
conspiracy
identity
members
conspiracy
needed
inasmuch
one
person
convicted
conspiring
persons
whose
names
unknown
affirmed
footnotes
question
goldschein
books
records
communist
party
denver
rogers
give
books
says
gave
january
year
care
answer
question
madam
rogers
rogers
told
wo
answer
rogers
feel
subject
person
persons
thing
going
order
finding
answer
questions
rogers
transcript
september
detained
tomorrow
morning
ten
meantime
may
consult
counsel
hearing
tomorrow
morning
ten
reasons
refusal
answer
questions
rogers
consult
counsel
yes
custody
marshal
time
get
counsel
bring
want
custody
marshal
spend
night
jail
afraid
transcript
pp
september
menin
entering
appearance
behalf
petitioner
regard
witness
rogers
read
transcript
transpired
yesterday
believe
upon
advice
answer
questions
propounded
menin
witness
jane
rogers
think
purge
contempt
answering
questions
case
witness
rogers
order
return
grand
jury
room
purges
contempt
upon
bringing
matter
back
discharged
meantime
remain
custody
person
shall
compelled
criminal
case
witness
amend
proceedings
leading
claim
privilege
petitioner
appear
transcript
pp
september
madam
still
persist
answering
questions
rogers
well
basis
menin
statements
morning
please
answer
question
yes
rogers
well
think
rather
undemocratic
honest
person
mind
letting
consider
make
statement
wish
rogers
well
said
honest
person
acquainted
tricks
legal
procedure
understand
reading
cases
morning
right
refuse
answer
questions
basis
tend
incriminate
read
right
decide
right
say
rogers
according
read
stand
right
make
changes
judgment
sentence
confined
custody
attorney
general
four
months
call
next
case
citing
vajtauer
commissioner
immigration
see
smith
corwin
construction
clause
rev
murdock
hale
henkel
mcalister
henkel
brown
walker
hale
henkel
wilson
wheeler
grant
essgee
brown
white
cf
fleischman
see
also
cases
cited
notes
supra
privilege
attach
books
organization
whether
books
question
required
records
type
considered
shapiro
membership
communist
party
crime
time
questions
case
asked
congress
since
expressly
provided
internal
security
act
act
stat
neither
holding
office
membership
communist
organization
person
shall
constitute
per
se
violation
subsection
subsection
section
criminal
statute
course
express
opinion
implications
legislation
upon
issues
presented
cases
quoted
approval
powers
pierre
buckeye
powder
hazard
powder
emphasis
supplied
arndstein
appeals
like
present
case
arose
involuntary
examination
reserved
problems
arising
possible
abuse
privilege
adversary
proceedings
compare
state
decisions
collected
viii
wigmore
evidence
quotes
foster
people
authoritative
summarizes
law
follows
case
ordinary
witness
hardly
present
doubt
may
waive
privilege
conceded
waives
exercising
option
answering
conceded
thus
inquiry
whether
answering
fact
waived
fact
two
related
facts
parts
whole
fact
forming
single
relevant
topic
waiver
part
waiver
remaining
parts
privilege
exists
sake
criminating
fact
whole
emphasis
original
heike
brown
walker
mason
pierre
presented
closer
question
since
detail
pierre
required
divulge
identify
person
without
whose
testimony
pierre
convicted
crime
course
pass
upon
precise
factual
question
decided
appeals
browne
donegan
pomerantz
grove
mcdonald
rosenthal
didenti
see
also
feder
worthington
justice
black
justice
frankfurter
justice
douglas
concur
dissenting
people
hostile
fifth
amendment
provision
unequivocally
commanding
official
shall
compel
person
witness
consider
provision
outmoded
relic
past
fears
generated
ancient
inquisitorial
practices
possibly
happen
reason
privilege
silent
sometimes
accepted
less
constitutional
nuisance
courts
abate
whenever
however
possible
end
achieved
two
obvious
judicial
techniques
narrow
construction
scope
privilege
broad
construction
doctrine
waiver
attempt
use
first
methods
however
runs
afoul
approximately
years
precedent
see
patricia
blau
cases
cited
almost
always
construed
amendment
broadly
view
compelling
person
convict
crime
contrary
principles
free
government
abhorrent
instincts
american
coercive
practice
may
suit
purposes
despotic
power
abide
pure
atmosphere
political
liberty
personal
freedom
boyd
cf
murdock
doctrine
waiver
seems
palatable
equally
effective
device
whittling
away
protection
afforded
privilege
although
think
today
application
doctrine
supported
past
decisions
course
never
doubted
constitutional
right
intentionally
relinquished
intention
might
found
course
conduct
shepard
barron
said
intention
waive
privilege
lightly
inferred
vague
uncertain
evidence
support
finding
waiver
smith
relying
johnson
zerbst
cases
cited
case
petitioner
evidence
intended
give
privilege
silence
concerning
persons
possession
communist
party
records
contrary
record
set
opinion
shows
intended
avoid
answering
question
whatever
ground
might
available
asserted
privilege
first
moment
became
aware
existence
fact
cases
make
crucial
ignored
decision
today
apparently
holding
uncertain
point
petitioner
testimony
regardless
intention
admission
associations
communist
party
automatically
affected
waiver
constitutional
protection
related
questions
adopt
rule
privilege
constitutional
safeguards
must
knowingly
waived
relegates
fifth
amendment
privilege
position
moreover
today
holding
creates
dilemma
witnesses
one
hand
risk
imprisonment
contempt
asserting
privilege
prematurely
might
lose
privilege
answer
single
question
view
makes
protection
depend
timing
refined
lawyers
let
alone
laymen
difficulty
knowing
claim
case
never
occurred
trial
judge
petitioner
waived
anything
even
voluntary
testimony
circumstances
work
waiver
petitioner
stated
grand
jury
standing
alone
amount
admission
guilt
furnish
clear
proof
crime
arndstein
mccarthy
furthermore
unlike
believe
question
petitioner
refused
answer
call
additional
incriminating
information
asked
names
persons
turned
communist
party
books
records
answer
relevant
future
prosecution
petitioner
violation
smith
act
also
conviction
might
depend
testimony
witnesses
thus
asked
identify
reasons
question
sought
disclosure
incriminating
highest
degree
certainly
one
say
answer
possibly
used
basis
aid
criminal
prosecution
witness
brown
walker
records
companion
cases
reveal
flagrant
disregard
constitutional
privileges
petitioner
others
called
grand
jury
special
attorney
charge
made
unwarranted
assurances
might
well
misled
witnesses
unable
match
legal
wits
making
admissions
although
petitioner
allowed
previous
day
consult
counsel
time
brought
district
final
consideration
case
judge
arbitrarily
refused
permit
counsel
speak
behalf
summarily
commanding
attorney
sit
almost
immediately
thereafter
sentenced
petitioner
four
months
imprisonment
convicting
district
judge
neither
held
intimated
privilege
waived
erroneous
belief
intimate
association
communist
party
incriminating
fact
therefore
although
describes
petitioner
claim
privilege
afterthought
seems
real
afterthought
case
affirmance
judgment
waiver
equivalent
theory
important
however
believe
today
expansion
waiver
doctrine
improperly
limits
one
fifth
amendment
great
safeguards
reverse
judgment
conviction
appendix
opinion
justice
black
next
case
dispose
ladies
goldschein
special
attorney
jane
rogers
goldschein
yes
sir
may
please
honor
step
madam
status
case
goldschein
rogers
refuses
answer
questions
propounded
grand
jury
room
brought
back
yesterday
says
answer
one
question
answer
others
advised
necessary
answer
questions
propounded
except
incriminate
violation
federal
offense
says
wo
answer
position
madam
menin
counsel
petitioner
think
misunderstanding
minute
please
seated
menin
please
seated
menin
well
represent
lady
moment
please
seated
menin
well
hear
due
course
madam
still
persist
answering
questions
rogers
well
basis
menin
statements
morning
please
answer
question
yes
rogers
well
think
rather
undemocratic
honest
person
mind
letting
consider
make
statement
wish
rogers
well
said
honest
person
acquainted
tricks
legal
procedure
understand
reading
cases
morning
right
refuse
answer
questions
basis
tend
incriminate
read
right
decide
right
say
rogers
according
read
stand
right
make
changes
judgment
sentence
confined
custody
attorney
general
four
months
call
next
case
transcript
record
pp
september
provision
must
broad
construction
favor
right
intended
secure
counselman
hitchcock
held
failure
specifically
invoke
privilege
prior
final
judgment
constituted
waiver
ex
rel
vajtauer
commissioner
immigration
murdock
cases
controlling
final
judgment
entered
petitioner
asserted
privilege
incriminate
federal
law
sentenced
standing
ground
see
appendix
following
opinion
reliance
brown
walker
indicating
privilege
waived
unintentionally
misplaced
brown
case
said
witness
elects
waive
privilege
permitted
stop
must
go
make
full
disclosure
emphasis
supplied
practical
difficulties
inherent
rule
announced
made
apparent
reading
opinions
pierre
see
note
accompanying
text
infra
today
opinion
seeks
derive
looser
test
certain
negative
language
subsequent
case
mccarthy
arndstein
said
previous
disclosure
ordinary
witness
actual
admission
guilt
incriminating
facts
deprived
privilege
stopping
short
case
however
quoted
approval
minimum
rule
previously
announced
moreover
stating
reason
arndstein
waived
privilege
said
since
find
none
answers
voluntarily
given
arndstein
either
way
denials
partial
disclosures
amounted
admission
showing
guilt
opinion
entitled
decline
answer
questions
might
tend
incriminate
also
suggested
michigan
case
foster
people
adopted
federal
rule
mccarthy
arndstein
supra
although
foster
case
cited
acceptance
intended
language
michigan
decision
majority
quotes
today
accepted
quotation
shown
fact
placed
reliance
english
case
regina
garbett
summarized
holding
following
makes
difference
right
witness
protection
incriminating
already
answered
part
entitled
claim
privilege
stage
inquiry
mccarthy
arndstein
supra
understand
holding
rely
statement
opinion
petitioner
privilege
respect
books
party
statement
course
relevant
present
case
issue
compelling
petitioner
turn
unprivileged
documents
possession
intend
suggest
witness
privileged
refusing
answer
incriminating
questions
merely
questions
relate
unprivileged
documents
must
point
decision
case
entirely
inconsistent
recent
unanimous
decision
patricia
blau
note
patricia
blau
supra
irving
blau
although
appeals
upheld
convictions
witnesses
called
grand
jury
made
following
comment
concerning
conduct
special
attorney
stock
statement
witness
investigation
grand
jury
proceeding
warranted
say
scope
grand
jury
investigation
neither
statement
substitute
constitutional
protection
rogers
irregularities
proceedings
also
pointed
conduct
prosecutor
similar
grand
jury
investigation
los
angeles
criticized
judges
ninth
circuit
alexander
said
government
attorney
pursued
tactics
tending
put
witness
guard
transcript
portion
proceedings
set
appendix
post
district
judge
sole
reference
waiver
made
case
petitioner
addressing
one
witnesses
however
judge
said
course
anything
testify
unless
signed
waiver
ca
used
trial
hereafter
law
emphasis
supplied
conviction
witness
nancy
wertheimer
one
reversed
appeals
rogers
description
abuses
led
incorporation
privilege
bill
rights
see
pittman
colonial
constitutional
history
privilege
america
rev