State v. Collymore

Summary

The court affirmed the judgment because the state's refusal to extend immunity to three witnesses during the defense case, even assuming it violated the immunity statute, did not establish a constitutional violation: the defendant did not show that the unavailable testimony was noncumulative, and the witnesses were not substantially coerced into remaining silent. The court also held that any error from admitting first-time in-court identification testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, because identity was not disputed for most charges and independent evidence established firearm possession for the remaining charge.