CALIFORNIA LEGAL DEFENSES: ENTRAPMENT
Law enforcement agencies frequently rely on undercover sting operations to catch criminals in the act of committing criminal offenses. These operations produce thousands of arrests and convictions each year. However, in some instances the police in these operations may cross the line of what is considered legal conduct, and the Legal Defense of Entrapment may apply.
Entrapment is defined as a situation in which a normally law-abiding individual is induced into committing a criminal act they otherwise would not have committed because of overbearing harassment, fraud, flattery or threats made by an official police source.
Officers in a sting operation are allowed to conduct certain actions, such as presenting an opportunity to commit a crime, initiating contact, and even telling the person that the operation is not a set up. However, these officers cannot cross the line and overly pressure someone into committing a crime, pester them, or falsely tell them that the act is legal.
One example in which the Entrapment defense usually is raised is with undercover sting operations meant to target Lewd Conduct pursuant to California Penal Code Section 647(a) PC. Undercover officers often set up sting operations in places such as public parks, beaches and restrooms in hopes of getting people to engage in public sexual behavior. However, if the undercover officer is too overbearing and crosses the line, a valid Entrapment defense may apply. Drug offenses are another example of a class of crimes that are often charged after police use unlawful Entrapment tactics.
The burden of proving the Entrapment defense is placed on the Defendant and can be a difficult thing to prove. As such, it is crucial to have the assistance of an effective Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney when proceeding on this defense.
Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Kraut is a former Deputy District Attorney with over 14 years of prosecutorial experience who is highly skilled at effectively raising legal defenses in order to protect his clients’ rights. Mr. Kraut is highly respected by law enforcement and prosecutors as a knowledgeable and skilled litigator who leaves no stone unturned in fighting on his clients’ behalf. Mr. Kraut has represented the families of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement and has effectively used this defense in criminal cases. If you or a loved have been charged with a criminal offense in the Los Angeles area, it is critical that you contact Mr. Kraut immediately.
For more information about the Entrapment Defense, and to schedule your free consultation, contact Los Angeles Defense Attorney Michael Kraut at the Kraut Criminal & DUI Lawyers. Mr. Kraut can be reached 24/7 at 888-334-6344 or 323-464-6453.
FAQs
A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant's lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct.
What is the burden of proof for entrapment defense? ›
Burden of Proof: The defendant has the burden of proving entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence. This means that the defendant must show more likely than not that he or she was entrapped after the prosecutor has proved the defendant is guilty of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
What is the entrapment defense in California? ›
To successfully use the entrapment defense, the defendant must provide evidence that the law enforcement officer was more likely than not responsible for coercing or inducing them into committing the charged offense.
What are the two types of entrapment? ›
There are two types of entrapment: subjective entrapment and objective entrapment. Some states use the subjective entrapment test, while other states use the objective entrapment test. Estoppel can be entrapment when the government uses it to convince someone to commit a crime.
What makes an entrapment defense valid? ›
“A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant's lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct.
What are the two tests of entrapment? ›
Historically, the two primary criteria for determining police entrapment have been termed the 'subjective' standard, which focuses upon the predisposition of defendants to commit the crimes with which they are charged, and the 'objective' standard, which ignores the defendant's predisposition to commit the crime and ...
Is entrapment hard to prove? ›
This can be difficult to prove, as the government agent's conduct must be more than just providing an opportunity for the crime to be committed. If the defense of entrapment is successful, the charges against the defendant will be acquitted at jury trial.
What is evidence of entrapment? ›
In order to successfully claim entrapment in California, you must prove by a “preponderance of the evidence that the conduct of law enforcement (or their agents) would have likely induced a “normally law-abiding person” to commit the charged offense.
Why is entrapment hard to prove? ›
Entrapment can be a difficult defense to assert because it requires the defendant to establish that the idea and impetus for the crime was introduced by government officials, and the defendant was not already willing or predisposed to commit the crime.
What are examples of entrapment defense? ›
Sally breaks down and sells the officer some drugs. The police officer then arrests Sally for selling drugs to an undercover police officer. This amount of badgering is enough to provide an entrapment defense and get the case dismissed.
THE ENTRAPMENT DEFENSE IS USED WHEN AN ACCUSED PERSON ALLEGES THAT HE NEVER WOULD HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER HAD NOT INSPIRED, INCITED, PERSUADED AND LURED HIM. THE VARIOUS POLICY REASONS UNDERLYING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DEFENSE ARE DISCUSSED.
What are the elements of entrapment in California? ›
In California, entrapment occurs if the following three circ*mstances existed: (1) an officer communi- cated with the defendant before he committed the crime with which he was charged, (2) the officer's communication included an inducement to commit the crime, and (3) the inducement was such that it would have ...
What criminal cases involve entrapment? ›
Cases - Entrapment
- Hampton v. United States. Was Hampton's conviction a result of entrapment and in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment? ...
- Jacobson v. United States. ...
- Masciale v. United States. ...
- Mathews v. United States. ...
- Sherman v. United States. ...
- United States v. Russell.
Entrapment is an affirmative legal defense.
In the most basic sense, it occurs when a government official, such as a police officer, uses threats, fraud, or harassment to induce or coerce someone to commit a crime they wouldn't ordinarily commit.
Can entrapment be claimed as a valid defense? ›
Police entrapment is considered a valid legal defense. It means that you only committed the charged crime because the police officer persuaded you to do it.
What is the key to an entrapment defense quizlet? ›
Under the common law subjective test, the defense of entrapment consists of two elements, (1) inducement: the criminal design must have originated with the law enforcement officers; and (2) predisposition: the defendant must not have been predisposed to commit the crime prior to the initial contact by the government.
What are the two most common inducements in entrapment activities? ›
Entrapment
- Inducement by Law Enforcement: The criminal idea is initiated by the police or a government agent.
- Lack of Predisposition: The individual was not inclined or prepared to commit the crime before law enforcement intervention.
The key elements of the entrapment defense include the following: It is an affirmative defense, meaning the defendant has the burden of convincing the jury of the defense. The inducement must come from a government agency, not a private individual.
What is the entrapment process? ›
Entrapment focuses on the origin of criminal intent. If the criminal intent originates with the government or law enforcement, the defendant is entrapped and can assert the defense. If the criminal intent originates with the defendant, then the defendant is acting independently and can be convicted of the offense.
CALIFORNIA LEGAL DEFENSES: ENTRAPMENT
