The District Court may compel testimony or production of evidence pursuant to § 46-15-331, MCA (requiring immunity if a witness is compelled by the court to produce any evidence that may incriminate him). Thus, an order pursuant to this statute is within the discretion of the District Court. State v. Kills on Top, 243 Mont. 56, 80, 793 P.2d 1273, 1289 (1990).
Fundamental fairness requires that a trial court compel testimony of a witness, with a corresponding grant of immunity, when defendant has requested the order and the testimony is relevant and material to the defendant's defense of entrapment. State v. Chapman, 209 Mont. 57, 69, 679 P.2d 1210, 1217 (1984).
The trial court's finding that there was no immunity bargain is entitled to a presumption of correctness on appeal. In reviewing the evidence, all conflicts should be resolved in favor of the determination below. If there is any substantial evidence of record tending to support the determination below, this Court should affirm said determination upon appeal. State v. Evans, 178, Mont. 96, 100, 582 P.2d 1211, 1213 (1978).