March 20, 1967
Ponente: Stewart, J.
SUMMARY
- Two Chicago police officers made a warrantless arrest of McCray for possession of narcotics (heroin) based on information the former received from an informant.
- During the pretrial, McCray filed a motion to suppress the evidence against him, arguing that his arrest was invalid. He also sought for the identity of the informant, to the objection of the State of lllinois, which invoked the testimonial privilege under state law against such disclosure.
- The US Supreme Court held that a court is under no absolute to require disclosure of an informer's identity for the purpose of determining only the question of probable cause for an arrest or search where there was ample evidence in an open and adversary proceeding that the informer was known to the officers to be reliable and that they made the arrest in good faith upon the information he supplied.
DOCTRINE
- A genuine privilege must be recognized for the identity of persons supplying the government with information concerning the commission of crimes. Communications of this kind ought to receive encouragement. They are discouraged if the informer's identity is disclosed.
- Whether an informer is motivated by good citizenship, promise of leniency or prospect of pecuniary reward, he will usually condition his cooperation on an assurance of anonymity - to protect himself and his family from harm, to preclude adverse social reactions and to avoid the risk of defamation or malicious prosecution actions against him.
- The government also has an interest in non-disclosure of the identity of its informers. Law enforcement officers often depend upon professional informers to furnish them with a flow of information about criminal activities. Revelation of the dual role played by such persons ends their usefulness to the government and discourages others from entering into a like relationship.
See full case digest / brief of the case HERE.