Subscribe to our social networks to follow new content, news and big sales
Indiana Code § 4-2-7-8 specifically mandates that certain informant information remain confidential. 2. Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) Wayne County Indiana Sheriff's Office - Facebook
If the CI did not follow police instructions (e.g., in a controlled buy), the evidence might be invalid.
While these rules primarily focus on protecting child victims and witnesses, they reinforce the broader, ongoing trend of limiting access to identifying information of sensitive informants in court filings. Specifically, the new rules mandate that certain individuals' names be redacted and replaced with anonymous designators (e.g., "Child Witness No. 1") in criminal actions. While CIs are not children, the emphasis on redaction of identities in open court records applies to the sealing of CI identities when their identity is, by law, protected. How to Challenge a Confidential Informant’s Evidence
To help me provide more tailored information, please let me know: confidential informant list indiana
: Indiana law and police standard operating procedures mandate that law enforcement must do everything possible to prevent the disclosure of a CI's identity.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws regarding confidential informants change. Consult a licensed Indiana attorney for case-specific guidance.
: Defendants must clearly demonstrate that the informant's identity or the content of their communication is "relevant and helpful to the defense" or "essential to a fair determination" of the trial. Indiana Code § 4-2-7-8 specifically mandates that certain
When a confidential informant list is leaked or improperly disclosed in Indiana, the repercussions ripple through the legal system, putting lives at risk and jeopardizing active investigations.
: If a CI is called as a witness at trial, their identity becomes public. Key Indiana Resources Wayne County Indiana Sheriff's Office - Facebook
A: Yes, but it is an uphill battle. A defendant must file a motion with the court and convince the judge that the CI's identity is to their defense. This is not common. The defendant must show more than just a desire to question the informant; they must demonstrate that the information is relevant and not available elsewhere. If the judge agrees, they may order the prosecution to reveal the CI's identity. If the prosecution refuses, the charges could be dismissed. While these rules primarily focus on protecting child
For defense lawyers in Indiana, the inability to access a CI list is a daily frustration. They often file motions to compel disclosure, arguing that their client has a Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. But prosecutors routinely invoke the informant’s privilege, and judges often side with the state.
: Prosecutors are instructed to invoke "informer's privilege" in court to maintain anonymity unless the informant is required to testify as a witness.
Why not? The answer lies in two critical factors:
A: It is a legal principle, recognized by Indiana courts, that allows the government to withhold the identity of a person who has given information about a crime to law enforcement. As established in cases like Schlomer v. State , the privilege exists to protect informants from retaliation and to encourage others to come forward with information.
Subscribe to our social networks to follow new content, news and big sales
