New Court Decision on Snitch Confidentiality Could Impact Your Drug Case

A recent decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court states the government must disclose non-identifying information regarding a police officer’s source of information that leads to arrest.

Minnesota Ruling on Confidential Informants

In criminal cases, the use of confidential informants, also referred to as “snitches,” is common in certain types of crimes that involve drugs, homicides, and sexual assaults. Many states rely on information provided by snitches to prove a case against a defendant. Minnesota law requires the State to protect a confidential informant’s identity, but recent changes allow Minnesota defense attorneys to hold police accountable when incriminating evidence is provided by a confidential informant.

On April 8, 2020, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a new ruling on the use of confidential informants. When a snitch provides incriminating evidence that leads to arrest, the government must now disclose non-identifying information about the source of the police officer’s information. The purpose of the ruling is to establish an informant’s reliability, while still protecting his/her identity. The courts look at several factors to determine whether a confidential informant is considered reliable:

  • Has the informant provided reliable information in the past?
  • Can police officers verify the information provided?
  • Did the informant come forward voluntarily?
  • Did the informant participate in an illegal sale or controlled purchase coordinated by the police?
  • Did the informant give any information against his/her own interests?

In a Minnesota criminal case, every criminal defense attorney has a responsibility to question authority that presents a risk to a defendant’s legal rights to a fair trial. Minneapolis drug attorneys often see drug arrests that are based on unlawful search and seizures and invalid search warrants. Every year, innocent people are arrested, charged, and even convicted of drug crimes based on untruthful or unreliable information acquired by snitches used by law enforcement.

The government’s use of confidential informants was integrated into law enforcement during the Prohibition Era in the 1920s. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms made snitches an integral part of the criminal justice system by using informants to catch alcohol and gun smugglers. Today,  snitches can earn forgiveness or leniency for every type of crime in exchange for information leading to arrests. Snitches have become law enforcement’s “tool of choice,” in the enforcement of drug-related crimes. It’s estimated that approximately 60% of defendants convicted of drug crimes are willing to act as snitches in exchange for reduced charges and prison sentences.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.