State v. White

Decision Date18 August 1982
Docket NumberNo. 82-1345,82-1345
Citation418 So.2d 411
PartiesSTATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Lorenzo WHITE, Respondent.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Michael A. Palecki, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for petitioner.

Jerry Hill, Public Defender, Bartow, and Robert J. Krauss, Asst. Public Defender, St. Petersburg, for respondent.

SCHOONOVER, Judge.

The State of Florida has filed a petition for writ of certiorari alleging that an order of the trial court which required the state to disclose the identity of a confidential informant departed from the essential requirements of law and should be quashed. We agree.

On January 20, 1982, a confidential informant, equipped with a body bug that relayed his voice but did not make a tape recording, was sent into a bar in St. Petersburg Florida, by detectives from the St. Petersburg Police Department. Shortly after entering the bar, the informant related to the detectives that he had observed the respondent dealing in cocaine and that after completing a sale, he put cocaine into his sock. He also described the clothes being worn by the respondent. After conveying this information to the detectives, he left the bar and had no direct knowledge of subsequent events.

Based solely upon the information given by the confidential informant, the respondent was sought out and stopped by the detectives. After a pat-down search revealed cocaine and marijuana in his sock, he was arrested for possession of cocaine and marijuana.

During the course of pre-trial proceedings, the detectives, while giving their depositions, refused to disclose the name and address of the informant, and the respondent then filed a motion to compel disclosure.

At the hearing on the motion, the state presented testimony concerning the event and the reliability of the confidential informant. The state also represented to the court that the confidential informant would not be called upon to testify at any hearing or trial. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court granted the respondent's motion to compel disclosure, and the state filed this petition for writ of certiorari.

Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(c)(2), provides as follows:

(2) Informants. Disclosure of a confidential informant shall not be required unless the confidential informant is to be produced at a hearing or trial, or a failure to disclose his identity will infringe the constitutional rights of the accused.

In addition to this procedural rule, it appears to be established law that the state is privileged to refuse disclosure of a confidential informant whose information is relied upon to establish probable cause, and the burden is upon the defendant to show he is entitled to an exception. State v. Matney, 236 So.2d 166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970).

Since the state represented to the trial court that the confidential informant would not be called upon to testify at any hearing or trial, the question before us is whether or not the respondent has carried his burden of showing that the failure to disclose the identity of the confidential informant will infringe upon his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • State v. Zamora
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 6 Diciembre 1988
    ...386 U.S. 1042, 87 S.Ct. 1474, 18 L.Ed.2d 616 (1967); State v. Kirksey, 418 So.2d 1152, 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); State v. White, 418 So.2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); State v. Martinez, 381 So.2d 1183, 1184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); State v. Katz, 295 So.2d 356 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974); State v. Matn......
  • State v. Acosta
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 1 Noviembre 1983
    ...provided good cause for a defendant's arrest is not enough to overcome the privilege of nondisclosure. State v. Kirksey; State v. White, 418 So.2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); State v. Martinez, 381 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). 1 Therefore, this was not a valid basis for the order compelling d......
  • State v. Harklerode
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 4 Octubre 1990
    ...3d DCA 1983) (fact that informant provided good cause for arrest not sufficient to overcome privilege of nondisclosure); State v. White, 418 So.2d 411 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) (state is privileged to refuse to disclose identity of confidential informant whose information was relied on to establis......
  • Forfeiture of 1985 Dodge No. JB3BA24KOFU124494, In re
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 21 Julio 1988
    ...the identity of a confidential informant who merely furnishes the probable cause basis for a search or an arrest." State v. White, 418 So.2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), (criminal case). Further, "[u]nless a defendant can establish that it will be necessary for the prosecution to refer to t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT