State of Connecticut v. Luis Diaz — Palmer, J., concurring

Summary

The concurrence agrees that the defendant's conviction should be affirmed and that plain-error review is unavailable. It would, however, have used the court's supervisory authority to require trial courts ordinarily to give a special credibility instruction whenever a government informer expects or seeks a benefit for testimony. The concurrence reasons that such witnesses have an unusually strong motive to fabricate or tailor testimony, even without an express agreement.