Roviaro v. United States (1956)
- Docket
- 58
- Decided
- 1956-01-01
- Category
- General
Summary
Question: In a prosecution for trafficking heroin, may the government conceal informant John Doe's identity if he helped to set up the sale of heroin and was present during the sale? Conclusion: No. Justice Harold Burton, writing for a majority in a 6-1 decision, held that Roviaro's interest in preparing his defense outweighed the public interest in protecting John Doe's identity. The Court focused on the fundamental requirements of fairness, reasoning that where the identity of an informant or the contents of an informant's communications are relevant and helpful to a defense, the government's privilege must give way. Justice Burton also noted that the charge in question required more than mere possession of heroin; Roviaro had the burden of justifying this possession, which underlined his need for access to material witnesses. John Doe was his only material witness. Justice Thomas Clark dissented. He wrote that the majority's decision jeopardizes the government's privilege in cases involving informants, especially in drug cases where informants are often necessary to the proper administration and prosecution of narcotic laws. He also suggested that Roviaro was attempting to win on a technicality --as he likely already knew the informant's identity-- rather than on the merits of the case. Justices Hugo Black and Charles Whittaker took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.