Under what condition may an informant's identity not need to be disclosed to a judge?

Under what condition may an informant's identity not need to be disclosed to a judge?

• A. It does not need to be disclosed if the officer can tell a judge as many facts as possible to show that the informant is credible and that the information was obtained in a trustworthy manner.
• B. The informant's name must be disclosed
• C. The informant's past criminal history must be shown
• D. The informant's address must be disclosed

Answer: (A)

Credibility and basis of knowledge for an informant can allow a judge to rely on the information without revealing the informant’s identity. If the officer can present enough facts showing that the informant is credible and that the information was obtained in a trustworthy manner, the judge can evaluate reliability from those details alone. That means details about how the informant learned the information, what was observed, and any independent corroboration can establish probable cause or trustworthiness without disclosing who provided it. Disclosing the name, address, or past history is not required if the presented facts sufficiently demonstrate reliability and basis of knowledge. The confidentiality of an informant serves safety and practical communication, but it doesn’t prevent the judge from assessing credibility when the information is well-supported.