Many drug trafficking defendants in Massachusetts are prosecuted on the basis of information from confidential informants or "CIs." The issue is that these CIs are inherently anonymous – and their use raises Sixth Amendment questions. In the United States, defendants are supposed to have the right to face their accusers in court. Without this principle, the government could theoretically fabricate charges and then claim that their evidence is "confidential." A recent case in Massachusetts provides further insights into this issue.
Prosecutors Refuse to Hand Over Confidential Informant Evidence in Drug Case
If you face evidence from a confidential informant in Massachusetts, you should be able to request some background information at the very least. However, a recent defendant was met with stiff opposition when his lawyer requested documents relating to a confidential informant in Boston.
This case stems from an alleged drug deal that took place in 2019. After receiving a tip from a confidential informant, police began tracking a man in a red Honda Accord. Eventually, they saw him carry out a suspected drug deal and quickly pulled him over. After searching his vehicle, they discovered various drugs and bundles of cash.
The defendant's attorney began to raise questions about whether the initial tipoff from the confidential informant was reliable. In response, the Commonwealth provided the defense lawyer with a memo written by a police officer. This memo waxed lyrical about this confidential informant, claiming that they had participated in numerous investigations involving drug distribution. In addition, the memo stated (for the first time) that this confidential informant had carried out a "controlled buy" from the defendant 72 hours before his arrest.
However, the defense lawyer was not satisfied with this report – and he requested additional documents during discovery. These included copies of all communications between the confidential informant and the police department – including text messages. The lawyer also requested a "track record" of the past cases this informant had assisted with. In addition, he requested more documentation about the alleged controlled buy. Perhaps most importantly, the defense lawyer requested "motive to lie" information. These documents could potentially expose conflicts of interest, as many informants "sell" information in exchange for money, shorter sentences, and other rewards.
While the judge did not force the prosecutors to hand over all of this information, she ordered them to provide the communication documents and any information about the "motive to lie." Amazingly, the Commonwealth simply refused to comply. As a result, the judge dismissed the case against the defendant. However, a higher court then determined that the judge erred – and that she should have considered a less severe sanction. As a result, the case will assumedly move forward again.
Can a Drug Trafficking Defense Lawyer in Massachusetts Help Me?
If you were arrested for drug trafficking in Massachusetts and you believe that the evidence came from a confidential informant, you may have various defense strategies to consider. To discuss your legal options in more detail, get in touch with a Boston defense lawyer. Choose Edward R. Molari, Attorney at Law, to work alongside a lawyer who has direct experience with drug cases. Book your consultation today to get started.