The use of contingent fee arrangement will not preclude the admissibility of the testimony of an informer. The credibility of the compensated witness is determined by a properly instructed jury. [United States v. Cervantes-Pacheco, 826 F.2d 310 (5th Cir. Tex. 1987)]
In Fresneda v. State, 483 P.2d 1011 (Alaska 1971), the court observed that just because the law recognizes that some witnesses, such as the accomplice and interested informer be the subject of cautionary instructions in some situations does not mean that every witness who comes forward to aid in the apprehension of those accused of criminal activity should be singled out for such treatment.