How we reported on undercover police operations in California jails

Last fall, CalMatters criminal justice reporter Cayla Mihalovich received a tip about a case pending before the California Supreme Court. It involved a man named David Allen, who was arrested on suspicion of murder in 2016 in Los Angeles County when he was 28. 

After his arrest, he invoked his right to silence four times. He was then targeted in a so-called “Perkins operation,” a controversial law enforcement tactic in which a police officer or civilian poses as an incarcerated person to elicit incriminating statements from a suspect. 

Statements Allen made to the Perkins operatives were, according to court records, “the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case” and ultimately helped lead to his conviction. He was sentenced to 45 years to life in prison. In his petition to the high court, he argued that his Fifth Amendment and federal due process rights were violated and called for his convictions to be reversed. 

As Mihalovich looked into the case, she learned the California Supreme Court had begun accepting more and more petitions like Allen’s. The cases involved defendants who claimed undercover agents coerced them into making incriminating statements after they invoked their Miranda rights — or persuaded them to waive those rights before a formal police interrogation. To date, the court has accepted at least nine Perkins cases behind Allen’s.

Mihalovich and her editors wanted to know more about Perkins operations. What is involved? How do they provide law enforcement with a way around Miranda protections? How much money do agencies spend on them? How are undercover agents recruited and trained? What are the demographics of those who are targeted?

Finding answers to many of our questions was challenging despite the voluminous court records we reviewed. Law enforcement and district attorney offices closely guard information surrounding their highly secretive operations. 

CalMatters filed nearly two dozen formal public records act requests with law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, San Bernardino, Orange and Santa Clara counties. Almost all were denied. After consulting with the First Amendment Coalition, CalMatters asked attorneys from the Covington & Burling law firm to press for more transparency. Over the course of several months, their efforts yielded a handful of exclusive law enforcement records. As this story publishes, they are continuing to press for more documents and are consulting with CalMatters editors about next steps. 

Today’s story is the most comprehensive look yet at Perkins operations. Mihalovich reviewed over 5,000 pages of court records and conducted more than 40 interviews with scholars, public defenders, district attorneys, prosecutors, lawmakers, advocates and incarcerated people. 

“It’s psychological war,” said Michelle Luna Reynoso, a criminal defense attorney in San Diego. “How is this not considered cruel and unusual punishment?” 

If you have a tip, email the reporter at [email protected] 

This project was completed with the support of a grant from Columbia University’s Ira A. Lipman Center for Journalism and Civil and Human Rights in conjunction with Arnold Ventures.