Judge: Informant must be identified
The identity of a confidential informant will now have to be disclosed in the case of a suspected drug dealer, after a county judge issued a ruling on the matter on Monday.
Butler County Judge Timothy McCune informed the prosecution and defense in a special status conference on Tuesday, following testimony and arguments regarding the issue on June 15.
The opinion and order requires the District Attorney's Office to disclose the identity of the informant to the defense before further court proceedings, which have yet to be scheduled, according to McCune.
Assistant District Attorney Laura Pitchford said her office has yet to make a decision whether they will appeal the decision or move forward with prosecution, as the order has yet to be docketed and publicly available.
Donald J. Hutchinson, 25, was charged with two counts of felony drug possession and two counts of felony criminal use of a communication facility following two alleged undercover purchases of heroin last year.
He has been held in the Butler County Prison on $15,000 bail following his arrest in January.
Hutchinson's attorney, William Jones Jr., argued that the informant's identity was material to the defense, as Hutchinson is denying he was involved in the crimes.
Hutchinson was investigated by officers with the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Bureau of Narcotics with help from the Butler County Drug Task Force.
In August, officers met with a confidential informant who told them that he was in contact with a drug dealer known as “Dutch,” according to the criminal complaint.
The informant on Aug. 22 arranged a meeting at Pullman Plaza with Hutchinson, identified by the informant as “Dutch.” While under surveillance of two officers, the informant allegedly met Hutchinson and another man behind the plaza and exchanged cash for an unspecified amount of heroin.
On June 15, Kristen Johnson, an agent with the Attorney General's Office Bureau of Narcotics, testified that she observed a hand-to-hand transaction in that incident behind the Kmart store.
She said surveillance units witnessed the two men walking to the plaza after the transaction was set up, and then leaving after the controlled purchase. Still photographs of one of the men, identified as Hutchinson, were taken.
Jones asked Johnson why only one of the men was photographed, and she testified that Hutchinson was the only person of interest at the time.
On Aug. 29, the informant allegedly arranged another purchase of heroin with Hutchinson while under surveillance near Penn Street.
In that incident, Johnson testified that she was out of eyesight of the transaction, but the informant returned and made a written report that the drugs were purchased from Hutchinson.
When asked by Jones if he was involved in narcotics sales to anyone on those two dates, Hutchinson testified, “No.”
Pitchford argued that the disclosure would put “the confidential informant's safety at risk by revealing it at this juncture and jeopardize ongoing cases.”
“This is a balancing test,” she said. “The public interest must be balanced to the defendant's need. The confidential informant's safety is the controlling factor in this argument.”
She said the confidential informant is currently involved in other pending cases, and disclosing the person's identity could possibly put that person's life at risk.
McCune stated that no evidence of a direct threat on the informant's life had been presented.
“This is a bald conclusion that the CI would be put at risk,” he said. “The law states the need for specific identification of risk.”
Hutchinson has previous drug arrests and is a felon, according to authorities.
