Roviaro v. United States
- Decided
- March 25, 1957
- Docket
- 58
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,599 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that right to a fair criminal trial overrode government-asserted informer’s privilege and required disclosure of informer’s identity and information — Andrea Smith Gregory Welsh Larry Hornstein v. James Cromer (1998)
- holding that informer’s privilege must yield to disclosure at trial if necessary to a “fair determination” — United States v. Pierce (2006)
- concluding that disclosure was appropriate where the informer “was the sole participant, other than the accused, in the transaction charged” — Ninestar Corp. v. United States (2024)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Mr. Justice Burton delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case concerns a conviction for violation of the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act, as amended.[1] [*55] The principal issue is whether the United States District Court committed reversible error when it allowed the Government to refuse to disclose the identity of an undercover employee who had taken a material part in bringing about the possession of certain drugs by the accused, had been present with the accused at the occurrence of the alleged crime, and might be a material witness as to whether the accused knowingly transported the drugs as charged. For the reasons hereafter stated, we hold that, under the circumstances here present, this was reversible error.
In 1955, in the Northern District of Illinois, petitioner, Albert Roviaro, was indicted on two counts by a federal grand jury. The first count charged that on August 12, 1954, at Chicago, Illinois, he sold heroin to one “John Doe” in violation of 26 U. S. C. § 2554 (a). The second charged that on the same date and in the same city he “did then and there fraudulently and knowingly receive, conceal, buy and facilitate the transportation and concealment after importation of . . . heroin, knowing the same to be imported into the United States contrary to law; in violation of Section 174, Title 21, United States Code.”
Statutes cited
- 26 U.S.C. § 2554
- 21 U.S.C. § 174
Cite this
Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 (1957)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.