Page:Brief for the United States, Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963).djvu/29

 is what constituted probable cause in the eyes of a reasonable, cautious and prudent peace officer under the circumstances of the moment.

B. THE COMBINATION OF THE NAMING OF PETITIONER TOY BY INFORMER HOM WAY AS HIS SOURCE OF SUPPLY OF NARCOTICS, AND THE ATTEMPTED FLIGHT OF TOY WHEN THE FEDERAL AGENT IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS A FEDERAL NARCOTICS AGENT, GAVE THE AGENT PROBABLE CAUSE JUSTIFYING THE IMMEDIATE ARREST OF TOY

At least two elements were operative in the arrest of petitioner Toy, and we need not and do not attempt to separate them or to rely upon either element alone. The combination of both, we believe, adds up to probable cause for the arrest of Toy.

1. Hom Way's statement that he had obtained narcotics from Toy was entitled to great weight.

The first element, in point of time, in the composite of elements that led to Toy's arrest was the statement of informer Hom Way that he had obtained an ounce of heroin, the night before, from Toy. In appraising the weight of that one statement, one cannot determine its reliability solely upon the basis of whether Hom Way had or had not previously furnished information to the agents. We think that, in stressing this factor, the court of appeals unduly emphasized what is only one element in the determination of an informer's reliability—the receipt of prior information from him. The element of past receipt of information would clearly be a favorable factor, but it is not indispensable. When this Court, in Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307, referred to the fact that there the government agent had received information from the special employee in the past, it was not ruling that