If you have been accused of a federal drug crime and have told you that the case against you implies a confidential (CI) informant, your next steps can dictate the rest of your life. These types of cases are complicated by design. Prosecutors often depend largely on the informants to build their narrative and press for the conviction, especially when they have no forceful evidence.
In Guzman Law Firm, we have defended clients in federal cases of high -risk drugs through Texas and beyond. We know how federal agents operate, which prosecutors will try to argue, and how to challenge the credibility of a confidential informant in the court.
If you are under investigation or have been accused of a federal drug crime, contacte a Guzman Law Firm now to (956) 516-7198 To protect your rights.
What is a confidential informant?
A confidential informant, or CI, is a person who facilitates security forces information on alleged criminal activities in exchange for clemency, payment or other incentives. In federal cases of drugs, confidential informants usually participate in research, sometimes making controlled purchases, establishing telephone conversations or providing privileged information about organizations of drug trafficking.
How can you know if a person is an informant? Unfortunately for the defendants, these individuals remain confidential to protect their identity, which means that as a defendant, it may not know who is accusing him or what is his relationship with the case. However, during the discovery and preparation of the trial, a Federal Defensor Lawyer Expert can obtain more details and potentially unmask the identity of the informant.
Federal prosecutors will argue that an informant is a crucial piece of the puzzle, but the reality is that the informants usually have personal reasons; They can be …
These motivations can drastically affect their credibility and become important attack points during a trial.
What are the rules for a confidential informant?
You believe it or not, there are norms and policies that govern the behavior of confidential informants (CI), especially in federal investigations, but the application of these norms can be inconsistent – and the informants are often allowed a surprising amount of freedom of action, including participation in criminal activities such as drug use, in certain circumstances.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) and federal agencies such as DEA, FBI and ATF follow internal guidelines regulating how the ICs are handled. These guidelines require that:
- Informators are evaluated and approved before being used, especially if they have a criminal record.
- Order forces document and control their activity
- The participation of an informant in an “illegal activity” (OIA) must be authorized and limited in writing.
Can confidential informants consume drugs?
Technically, no. It is assumed that confidential informants cannot consume or distribute drugs while cooperating with federal agents. However, in practice, exceptions are often made, especially when:
- The IC has a drug use history and total abstinence is considered unrealistic.
- Drug use is part of maintaining covert credibility
- Agents are glad in certain behaviors to preserve the relationship or research
In some situations, confidential informants have even committed crimes (including sale or drug trafficking) while cooperating and received indulgence because their work was considered valuable; But this may be exactly what makes a confidential informant not credible. If the confidant is consuming drugs during the investigation, his perception, memory and reliability could be compromised, but he will need a very good lawyer to argue.
How is the testimony of the informants in federal courts
In federal cases of drugs, prosecutors often use the testimony of confidential informants to fill the gaps where physical tests are weak. Informants can testify about:
- Drug purchases that say they have made the accused
- Text conversations related to drug trafficking
- The defendant’s role in a drug trafficking network
- The location of hiding places, weapons or money
However, federal courts recognize that the testimony of the informants can be unreliable. Many informants have a criminal record, active cases or economic incentives linked to their cooperation. These factors introduce important credibility problems. A judge or jury will weigh this testimony carefully.
Federal judges usually give specific instructions to jurors advising them to be cautious with the testimonies of informants. And if an informant lies under oath, the door opens to accusations of perjury, null judgments and evidence of evidence.
The key to challenging the testimony of an informant lies in exposing the inconsistencies, reasons and credibility problems, something that a federal defense lawyer can do through the contrainterrogatory and the presentation of evidence before the trial.
Keep reading: What are the federal guidelines for the imposition of penalties for drug trafficking?
How a federal defense lawyer can challenge the testimony of a confidential informant
In Guzman Law Firm, we have handled many cases where a confidential informant was central to the government’s strategy. We know that the simple fact of being labeled as an “informant” does not make someone trustworthy or even truthful. Here is as a lawyer can work to discredit or limit the impact of the testimony of a confidential informant:
- Reasons Exhibition: We investigate the background of the confidant (for example, to which criminal charges he faces, if he has charged or if he has promised a reduction of conviction). If a person has all to win by lying, we make it clear to the court.
- Discovery and suppression motions: We press to reveal the identity of the informant, his history and his relationship with the forces of the order. In some cases, we present motions to suppress the statements of the informant or the evidence obtained through questionable tactics, for example, if the confidant participated in an illegal surveillance or in a trap.
- CONTRADROGATORY: During the trial, the counter -interrogation of an informant can reveal contradictions, inconsistencies and possible inventions in its history. If the informant has a history of lies, drug use or misconduct in previous cases, we ensure that the jury knows.
- Alternative theories: We can present witnesses or evidence that goes against the version of the facts of the confidant. Video recordings, witnesses with alibi or telephone records can question their chronology or credibility.
When exposing these weaknesses, we work to change the approach again to the burden of the prosecution of the prosecution – not the word of a potentially committed witness. Ultimately, the objective is to sow enough doubts about the reliability of the informant so that his testimony cannot serve as a basis for a conviction.
Do not leave your freedom at random. Get a strong defense of Guzman Law Firm.
If you have been accused based on the word of a confidential informant or pressed to become one, what is at stake is too high to do it alone. Federal drug charges They are made to intimidate, and prosecutors will use all the tools they can, including informants encouraged by doubtful credibility.
In Guzman Law Firm, we know how to make holes in the case of the Prosecutor’s Office, challenge weak or tendentious testimonies, and protect our clients from being manipulated by the police. If your case involves the testimony of a confidential informant, contact us immediately. Your future may depend on what you do next, and we are here to help you do it well.
Call Guzman Law Firm today at (956) 516-7198 To program one Confidential consultation and build a defense that works.
More help articles by Guzman Law Firm:
