Informants must have a certain level of reliability.
If you’re a fan of crime dramas, you’re probably familiar with the concept of an informant. In simple terms, an informant who provides information about criminal activity or people committing crimes to the police. In many cases, informants are involved in criminal activity themselves, which is the source of their information. There are many reasons why an informant may do this, including to get leniency on a criminal case of their own, for money, or to avoid being charged with a crime.
As a criminal defense lawyer in Riverside, CA can explain, there are two primary types of informants: citizen informants and police confidential informers. Citizen informants are people who witness or otherwise know about a crime, and go to the police with that information. For example, if a person saw someone that they know break into a neighbor’s house, they may go to the police and tell them what they saw. Citizen informants are typically people who come forward for no other reason than to do the right thing.
In contrast, police confidential informers are people who provide information to the police in return for something. That may be cash payments from the police or to get more favorable treatment in their own criminal case. A classic example of this type of informant is a person who is caught in possession of drugs. A prosecutor may offer a favorable deal in exchange for that person gathering information about the person or people who sold her the drugs.
Informants are often used as a way to get a warrant, although their testimony may be used at trial or in preliminary hearings. At trial or in a hearing, a criminal defense lawyer in Riverside, CA will have the opportunity to question the informant to reveal any bias or motivation to not be truthful. However, when an informant is used to obtain a search warrant, there is no such opportunity. This can become an issue when the informant is a police confidential informer, rather than a citizen informant, as their credibility may be an issue.
In these situations, a police officer seeking a search warrant must prove that their informant is reliable. Citizen informants are presumed to supply reliable information, because they do not have a motivation to lie. In contrast, confidential police informers may not be as reliable given tat they often are involved in criminal activity themselves. Courts evaluate the information provided by police confidential informants based on several factors, starting with whether they have provided accurate information in the past.
A “tested” police informant is a person who has a history of providing reliable information to the police. Their information is presumed to be credible unless there is a reason to believe otherwise. “Untested” police informants can usually only be used if their information is corroborated. In other words, law enforcement must provide other evidence to show that their source is reliable or that their information is accurate. For example, if a person arrested for drug possession becomes an informant, and describes where and how their dealer operates, the police may be able to corroborate that information by surveilling that location. If the police surveillance shows that the informer’s statements are accurate, that may be sufficient for a court to grant a search warrant.
If you are involved in a criminal case where an informant was used, your criminal defense lawyer in Riverside, CA may challenge a search warrant on the basis that the informer was not credible or reliable. Alternatively, your attorney may aggressively cross examine the informer at a hearing or at trial to show their bias or motivation to lie.
At the Chambers Law Firm, we represent people who have been charged with California criminal offenses, from minor charges to capital crimes. Contact us today at 714-760-4088 or dchambers@clfca.com to schedule a free initial consultation with a member of our team.
