U.S. v. Smith

In prosecution on drug conspiracy charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion for new trial based on prosecutor's surprise disclosure during trial of identity of confidential informant who spoke with defendant on recorded conversation. While prosecutor did not offer good explanation as to why govt. refused to identify confidential informant prior to trial, said failure did not require new trial where: (1) defendant should have known of identity of confidential informant from other pre-trial disclosures including subject recorded conversation; (2) defendant refused Dist. Ct.'s offer of recess to prepare defense in response to said disclosure; (3) defendant failed to show how disclosure affected any of his defense theories; and (4) evidence against defendant on charged offense was strong.