D.S.D.: Def showed that CI had material information for suppression hearing; disclosure of identity ordered

This CI’s identity was shown to be material for the suppression motion because of his alleged motive to lie. Moreover, the government does not specify that the CI will or will not be called as a witness at trial. The CI could be because the affidavit shows he or she has material information to guilt or innocence. United States v. Johnson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128038 (D.S.D. September 24, 2015):

Here, the court finds Mr. Johnson has established the materiality of SOI 1’s identity. SOI 1 was not a mere tipster. SOI 1 was a key witness who both allegedly saw Mr. Johnson commit the crime he is accused of and who also participated in the crime along with Mr. Johnson (SOI 1 said they purchased several ounces of meth from Mr. Johnson over the course of six weeks). The court notes, however, that the search warrant relies on incriminating information about Mr. Johnson’s drug dealing from a number of sources, so SOI 1 is by no means the sole accuser or source of incriminating information. Although neither party enlightens the court as to the evidence in this case as a whole and how great a part of that total picture SOI 1’s testimony is likely to be, the court believes nevertheless that SOI 1’s testimony is “material.”

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.