People v. Drucker

159 Misc. 2d 205, 603 N.Y.S.2d 651 (Crim Ct. 1993)

 

RULE:

Although the identity of the undercover officer need not be revealed in a complaint or supporting deposition, there must be something in either the complaint or the supporting deposition by which it may be determined that the person executing the supporting deposition is in fact the informant mentioned in the complaint. The use of the informant's badge number is one method approved by the courts by which a complaint may be converted to an information without revealing the informant's identity.

FACTS:

A woman was alleged to have solicited an undercover police officer and agreed to exchange sex acts for money. She was charged with prostitution. The complaint, however, which was to form the basis of the information was based on hearsay testimony of the police officer. The undercover officer provided his badge number for the supporting deposition, but no badge number was provided for the complaint itself. Thus, the woman filed a motion to have the charge dismissed.

ISSUE:

Should the court dismiss the charge?

ANSWER:

Yes.

CONCLUSION:

The Court concluded that there was inadequate evidence to meet the requirement for an information under N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 100.40(1)(c), which provides that for an information to be sufficient on its face it is necessary that nonhearsay allegations of the factual part of the information and of any supporting depositions establish, if true, every element of the offense charged and the defendant's commission thereof.

Click here to view the full text case and earn your Daily Research Points.