Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A person who supplies law enforcement with information about suspected criminal activity, whether as an anonymous tipster, a cooperating witness, or an undercover operative placed in custody.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Direct Waistband Retrieval During Terry Stop
Ibrahim Iqbal was stopped after an informant reported a concealed revolver in his waistband. The officer reached directly into the waistband and recovered the handgun without first conducting a pat-down. The retrieval was upheld because the specific weapon tip justified the intrusion even though the tip alone did not establish probable cause.
Totality Test Upholds Warrant From Tip
Isla Ireland's apartment was searched under a warrant based on an anonymous informant's detailed prediction of drug deliveries. Officers corroborated the predicted timing and vehicle movements. The warrant was valid because the strong predictive accuracy compensated for the unknown veracity of the informant under the flexible totality standard.
Ines Ibarra was indicted and placed in a cell with Ivan Ivanov, who had been instructed only to listen. Ivanov reported statements Ibarra volunteered about the charged scheme. The statements were admissible because the informant took no action designed to elicit incriminating remarks.
Paid Informant Elicits Post-Indictment Statements
Irene Ingalls was indicted for fraud and housed with Ingrid Innes, a paid informant directed to ask about the charged transactions. Innes posed targeted questions that prompted detailed admissions. The statements were suppressed because the deliberate elicitation after indictment violated the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
Private Citizen Sues for Statutory Penalty
Insight Consulting discovered that Imperial Motors had circulated unstamped notes in violation of state law. Insight filed suit as the informer to recover the prescribed penalty, with half going to the state. The action proceeded under the statute authorizing a private citizen to enforce the penalty provision.
Brown v. United States12 U.S. 110 (1814)
State Statute Awards Penalty to Informer
A Maryland banking statute imposed a $500 forfeiture on directors who issued unstamped notes and directed that half the recovery go to the informer. Ironwood Capital brought the action and claimed its share of the penalty. The provision created a direct financial incentive for private enforcement of the regulatory violation.
McCulloch v. Maryland17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
5
When may an officer reach directly into clothing based on an informant tip during a Terry stop?+
An officer may reach directly into a suspect's clothing to retrieve a suspected weapon when the officer has specific information that a weapon is hidden there, even if the tip is insufficient to establish probable cause.
Supporting sources
How is probable cause evaluated when it rests on an informant's tip?+
Probable cause is assessed under a totality-of-the-circumstances test in which an informant's veracity, reliability, and basis of knowledge are relevant but not rigid prerequisites. A strong showing on one factor can compensate for weakness on others.
Supporting sources
Does placing an informant in a defendant's cell after indictment violate the Sixth Amendment?+
Placing an informant in a defendant's cell after indictment does not violate the Sixth Amendment unless the informant takes action beyond mere listening that is deliberately designed to elicit incriminating remarks.
Supporting sources
What renders a jailhouse informant's elicitation unconstitutional after indictment?+
The Sixth Amendment is violated when the government places a paid, undisclosed informant in the defendant's cell who deliberately elicits statements about the charged offense.
Supporting sources
May the government withhold an informant's identity at a suppression hearing?+
The government is generally not required to disclose an informant's identity at a suppression hearing so long as the magistrate can assess the reliability of the information from the affidavit or testimony.
Supporting sources
541 U.S. 36 (2004)Evidence
…v. United States , 483 U. S. 171, 181-184 (1987), admitted statements made unwittingly to a Federal Bureau of Investigation informant after applying a more general test that did not make prior cross-examination an indispensable requirement.[^maj-8] Lee v. Illinois , 476 U. S. 530 (1986), on which the State relies, is…