King v. State

In King v. State, 273 Ga. 258 (539 SE2d 783) (2000) the defendant argued that the trial court erred by conducting a hearing outside of his presence to determine whether a witness should be compelled to testify against him in exchange for use and derivative use immunity. See id. at 264 (15). The Supreme Court of Georgia explained that the immunity hearing for the witness was not a part of the proceedings against the defendant, holding that while the defendant might have preferred that a key witness not be ordered to testify truthfully in his trial, there is nothing in Georgia law that would have permitted him to object to the State's request for the order or that would suggest that the defendant's rights were the subject matter under consideration. On the contrary, the trial court was obliged to consider whether the testimony was "necessary to the public interest," a matter which the defendant had no standing to address. Id. at 264-265 (15).