California’s Supreme Court is set to weigh in on at least 10 cases this year involving one of law enforcement’s more controversial tools: undercover “Perkins operations,” in which officers pose as fellow inmates to elicit confessions from suspects held in county jails, including here in the Inland Empire.
The practice, named after a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, has helped prosecutors close hundreds of murder cases across the state. But defense attorneys, civil rights groups and a growing number of appellate judges argue the tactic has been stretched well beyond its original intent — particularly in cases where suspects had already invoked their right to remain silent.
A months-long investigation by CalMatters, drawing on more than 5,000 pages of court records and over 40 interviews with attorneys, scholars, lawmakers and people who were subject to the operations, offers the most detailed public accounting yet of how these stings work and who they target. Here’s what the review found.
A murky legal standing
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1990 that statements suspects make to undercover jailhouse operatives are considered voluntary, meaning police aren’t required to read Miranda warnings before deploying an agent. But that decision left unresolved a key question now working through California’s courts: whether investigators can keep running these operations after a suspect has already asserted their Miranda rights during an earlier interrogation.
The state’s high court declined to take up a related case in 2019 involving a Kern County man who was targeted by an undercover operative just one day after invoking his rights. Even so, Justice Goodwin Liu wrote a pointed dissent, warning that deceptive tactics used to bypass Miranda protections had become widespread across California law enforcement. “How is it possible,” he asked, “that the protections of Miranda are so easily evaded?”
How the operations unfold
According to court records reviewed by CalMatters, the undercover operatives — often called Perkins agents — are typically older and more physically imposing than the suspects they’re paired with. Many pose as seasoned, high-ranking gang members with violent reputations. In some documented cases, jail officials placed as many as five agents in a cell with a single target.
Martín Flores, a gang expert who has studied these operations extensively, said the goal for many detainees becomes proving themselves to the undercover agent, largely out of self-preservation. “If you look weak and vulnerable, you’re going to become the prey,” he said.
Records show jail cells wired with hidden recording equipment, substantial payments made to operatives, and staged evidence designed to prompt suspects into talking.
Scrutiny across Southern California
CalMatters identified Perkins operations conducted in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, Orange, Santa Barbara and Santa Clara counties. Riverside County’s first documented operation dates to 2014, and records show its law enforcement agencies now run several such stings weekly — roughly half of them on behalf of outside agencies whose identities were not disclosed.
Earlier this year, the 4th District Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of a Riverside County man, who has consistently maintained his innocence, after finding investigators violated his rights by continuing an operation after he had invoked his right to counsel. The court ruled that once a suspect invokes and does not waive that right, continued efforts by law enforcement to “stimulate” conversation through an operation amount to an unlawful custodial interrogation — making any resulting statements inadmissible.
Questions of racial bias
Of the cases now before the California Supreme Court, four defendants are Hispanic, four are Black and two are white; the youngest was just 18 at the time of the operation.
The California Public Defenders Association and the ACLU have urged the court to examine whether the practice disproportionately affects people of color. They point to an analysis by the Riverside County Public Defender’s Office of roughly 880 murder cases from January 2015 through June 2023, which found Black defendants were targeted in Perkins operations at more than four times the rate of white defendants, while Latino defendants were targeted at twice the rate.
In San Diego County, public defenders have filed the state’s first Racial Justice Act petition connected to a Perkins operation, a law that allows defendants to challenge convictions they believe were tainted by racial bias. Their review of roughly 40 operations found agents repeatedly used racial slurs and leaned on cultural stereotypes to build false trust with suspects.
San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan pushed back on those findings, telling CalMatters that the operations are used consistently “wherever it appears that a heartless murder can benefit,” regardless of a suspect’s race, gender or background.
A veil of secrecy
Law enforcement agencies have been notably resistant to releasing information about how Perkins operations are funded, staffed and trained. CalMatters filed nearly two dozen public records requests with agencies in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, San Bernardino, Orange and Santa Clara counties — almost all of which were denied.
It wasn’t until attorneys from the law firm Covington & Burling, working with the First Amendment Coalition, pressed the issue over several months that a limited set of records was ultimately released, offering a rare glimpse into a practice that has otherwise remained largely hidden from public view.
Original source: CalMatters
