9
406 U.S. 472 92 S.Ct. 1670 32 L.Ed.2d 234 Joseph Arthur ZICARELLI, Appellant, v. The NEW JERSEY STATE COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATION. No. 69—4. Argued Jan. 11, 1972. Decided May 22, 1972. Syllabus After appellant invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to answer questions concerning organized crime, racketeering, and political corruption in Long Branch, New Jersey, appellee Commission granted him statutory immunity 'from having such responsive answer given by him or such responsive evidence produced by him or evidence derived therefrom used to expose him to criminal prosecution or penalty or to a forfeiture of his estate . . ..' Appellant still refused to answer, contending that full transactional immunity was required, that the statutory ban on the use and derivative use of 'responsive' answers is unconstitutionally vague, and that the immunity would not protect him from foreign prosecution, of which he has a real and substantial fear. Appellant was adjudged to be in contempt and the judgment was upheld on appeal. The New Jersey Supreme Court, construing the responsiveness limitation, held that 'the statute protects the witness against answers and evidence he in good faith believed were demanded .' Commissio n procedure p rovides for a n advance statement of the subject matter of the questioning and permits a witness to have counsel present at the hearing. Held: 1. The New Jersey statutory immunity from use and derivative use is coextensive with the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination, and is sufficient to compel testimony. Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 92 S.Ct. 1653, 32 L.Ed.2d 212. p. 441. Pp. 474—476. 2. In light of the State Supreme Court's construction and the context in
