This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-09-17 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| There is a logical and critical rationale behind the accepted practice of leaving out a confidential informant from the prosecution's roster of witnesses. As held in People v. Peñaflorida, Jr.,[9] the presentation of an informant is not essential for conviction nor is it indispensable for a successful prosecution because his testimony would merely be corroborative and cumulative. More importantly, as Peñaflorida, Jr. and other similar drug cases teach, informants are by and large not presented as witnesses in court as there is a need to conceal their identity and protect their important service to law enforcement. Living in the fringes of the underworld, these police assets may well be unwilling to expose themselves to possible liquidation by drug syndicates and their allies should their identities be revealed. | |||||