Click on the case titles to link to the full case decision.
Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293 (1966)-
- No rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated by the failure of government informer to disclose his role. When Hoffa made incriminating statements to or in the presence of the informer, his invitee, he relied, not on the security of the hotel room, but on his misplaced confidence that the informer would not reveal his wrongdoing.
- Hoffa's conversations with the informer, being entirely voluntary, involved no Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination.
- The use of a secret informer is not per se unconstitutional, and the use of the informer in this case did not violate due process requirements, his veracity having been fully subject to the safeguards of cross-examination and the trial court's instructions to the jury.
Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279 (1991)-An FBI informant in jail coerced a confession from a child murder suspect. The informant offered to protect the suspect from abuse from other inmates if the suspect confessed to him about the murder. The court excluded the confession.
Kansas v. Ventris, 556 US 586 (2009)-An informant was put in Ventris's cell prior to trial. The informant heard Ventris admit to robbing and shooting the victim. Ventris later testified at the trial that his accompice did the shooting. The informant acting as an agent of law enforcement, violated Ventris's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Held: Ventris’s statement to the informant, concededly elicited in violation of the Sixth Amendment , was admissible to impeach his inconsistent testimony at trial.