Commonwealth v. Jordan
980 N.E.2d 454
Mass.2012Background
- Jordan was indicted in the Superior Court for armed assault with intent to murder and other offenses.
- Jordan moved for information about the alleged victim’s status as a police informant to illuminate his state of mind.
- The judge ordered the prosecutor to ask the alleged victim if he was an informant and to report the result to defense counsel.
- The Commonwealth sought relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, arguing extraordinary review was warranted.
- The court reversed the judge’s order to question the alleged victim and reaffirmed that informant status is generally confidential and not material to self-defense.
- The opinion also notes that the inquiry into the informant status of a police informant and reporting to defense counsel was not required by the duty to disclose exculpatory information and that the informant’s status is irrelevant to Jordan’s self-defense claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Commonwealth may obtain interlocutory relief to compel inquiry about informant status | Jordan sought to force inquiry; Commonwealth argues extraordinary review warranted | Beal and privilege protect informant identity; no duty to compel inquiry | Yes, but reversed to exclude inquiry of victim |
| Whether a prosecutor may be required to ask independent witnesses about informant status | Beal limits defense-directed inquiries | State has no duty to probe informant status of witnesses | Inquiry not required; privilege and discretion retained |
| Whether informant status is material to self-defense instructions | Informant status could affect self-defense assessment | Status is not tied to elements of self-defense | Not material to the self-defense claim; no instruction based on informant status |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Beal, 429 Mass. 530 (Mass. 1999) (prosecution not required to probe complainant's mental health or be used for defense-directed inquiries)
- Commonwealth v. Madigan, 449 Mass. 702 (Mass. 2007) (informant identity privilege; limited disclosure under certain circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Elias, 463 Mass. 1015 (Mass. 2012) (materiality of informant information; required for fair jury presentation in limited cases)
- Commonwealth v. Richardson, 454 Mass. 1005 (Mass. 2009) (extraordinary review only for irremediable error; exceptional circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Cook, 380 Mass. 314 (Mass. 1980) (limits on supervisory review of interlocutory matters)