In Kalino v. Fletcher (1997), the court ruled that a prosecutor may be sued for making false statements of fact in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant. How does this ruling correlate with the concept of prosecutorial immunity?

Explanation:

In Kalina v. Fletcher (1997), the court ruled that a prosecutor may be sued for making false statements of fact in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant. This is occurred when Prosecutor Kalina was sued by Fletcher for making two inaccurate factual statements regarding him during his trial.

Prosecutor Kalina, therefore, seeked the provisions of prosecutorial immunity from the court to gain immunity. However, this was rejected as the court claimed that a prosecutor may be sued for making false statements of fact in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant.

This ruling correlate with the concept of prosecutorial immunity becuase she was denied of such immunity. It ruled that her conduct could not be protected through prosecutorial immunity.

explanation:

the muslim keep their culture pure by finding new value

uncle sam would be tossing and turning in his grave : *)