However, “the plausible showing” must include how the informant’s information would significantly aid the defense and be more than mere speculation or conjecture that the informant’s testimony is relevant. A “plausible showing” does not require concrete evidence that the informant can provide this type of testimony. Many of these exceptions apply almost exclusively in criminal cases.įirst, in Rule 508 subsection (c)(2)(a), which makes an exception for testimony about the merits in a criminal case, the privilege does not apply “if the court finds a reasonable probability exists that the informer can give testimony necessary to a fair determination of guilt or innocence.” Here, the defendant bears the burden of making a “plausible showing” that the informant could provide testimony that is necessary to make a fair determination of guilt. Exception One to the Informer Privilege: Necessary to Determine Guilt/InnocenceĪs is typical of most Rules of Evidence, Rule 508 provides a number of exceptions to when the Identity of Informer Privilege may be invoked. Rule 508 of the Texas Rules of Evidence creates the “Informer’s Identity Privilege.” The general rule states that “The United States, a state, or a subdivision of either has a privilege to refuse to disclose a person’s identity if: (1) the person has furnished information to a law enforcement officer or a member of a legislative committee or its staff conducting an investigation of a possible violation of law and (2) the information relates to or assists in the investigation.” The privilege is held by the representative of the public entity to which the informer furnished the information - for example, a detective working for your local police department or the prosecutor representing the State in a criminal matter. Here’s a brief overview of these two sections of criminal law and how courts determine whether or not a confidential informant’s identity may be disclosed. ![]() Because of the recent legislative changes in the latter, the process for how these two laws work together is still being developed through case law. ![]() In Texas, two laws guide the privilege protecting a confidential informer’s identity – Texas Rule of Evidence 508 and Article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. This article follows the development and evolution of the Informer Privilege. The 2014 overhaul of the discovery processes in criminal cases in Texas broadened the information that must be made available to a defendant. Preserving this protection of anonymity is important to cultivating the relationship between informants and law enforcement but is secondary to the need to provide accused citizens with fair trials. Though the film world has undoubtedly glamorized the life of a confidential informant by adding a dramatic flair to their undercover lives, the plotlines focused on protecting the identity of confidential informants is rooted in reality. Often fodder for Hollywood blockbusters such as Black Mass, Reservoir Dogs, and The Departed, the secrecy surrounding the identity of confidential informants has always captivated the public.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |