NCJ Number
86590
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 51 Issue: 12 Dated: (December 1982) Pages: 19-24
Date Published
1982
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This second part of a two-part article discusses the corroboration of hearsay information and other approaches that might be taken to establish probable cause while protecting an informant's identity.
Abstract
In the cases of Draper v. United States and Spinelli v. United States, the Supreme Court adopted the principle that corroboration may consist of simply verifying the details of a tip, although the details may not be of a suspicious nature. The Spinelli case refined the details of this principle. Perhaps a better form of corroboration is that of uncovering suspicious conduct of the suspect which suggests the crime being investigated. The case of Dawson v. State in Maryland provides an example of this. Another means of corroboration is for a second informant to give a report which independently corroborates the first report. The Supreme Court also recognizes corroboration based on the police officer's knowledge of the defendant's propensity for committing the crime under investigation. The courts have also endorsed double hearsay, in which information from an informant whose information is based on another's report, is considered sufficient when the information from each of the sources meets the standard established in the Aguilar case. Having the informant file an affidavit before a magistrate is a further method, which may be used with a first-time informant. Asking a court to seal the affidavit or using the grand jury process are ways of protecting an informant's identity. Resourceful and imaginative police officers may discover additional ways for converting a tip into one which constitutes probable cause. Forty-three reference notes are provided.