ENTRAPMENT
The act of government agents or officials that induces a person to commit a crime he or she is not previously disposed to commit.
Entrapment is a defense to criminal charges when it is established that the agent or official
originated the idea of the crime and induced the accused to engage in it. If the crime was promoted by a private person who has no connection to the government, it is not entrapment. A person induced by a friend to sell drugs has no legal excuse when police are informed that the person has agreed to make the sale.
The rationale underlying the defense is to deter law enforcement officers from engaging in
reprehensible conduct by inducing persons not disposed to commit crimes to engage in criminal activity. In their efforts to obtain evidence and combat crime, however, officers are permitted to use some deception. For example, an officer may pretend to be a drug addict in order to apprehend a person suspected of selling drugs.
On the other hand, an officer cannot use chi-
canery or FRAUD to lure a person to commit a
crime the person is not previously willing to
commit. Generally, the defense is not available if
the officer merely created an opportunity for the
commission of the crime by a person already
planning or willing to commit it.
The defense of entrapment frequently arises
when crimes are committed against willing vic-
tims. It is likely to be asserted to counter such
charges as illegal sales of liquor or narcotics,
BRIBERY, SEX OFFENSES, and gambling. Persons
who commit these types of crimes are most eas-
ily apprehended when officers disguise them-
selves as willing victims.
Most states require a defendant who raises
the defense of entrapment to prove he or she
did not have a previous intent to commit the
crime. Courts determine whether a defendant
had a predisposition to commit a crime by
examining the person’s behavior prior to the
commission of the crime and by inquiring into
the person’s past criminal record if one exists.
Usually, a predisposition is found if a defendant
was previously involved in criminal conduct
similar to the crime with which he or she is
charged.
When an officer supplies an accused with a
tool or a means necessary to commit the crime,
the defense is not automatically established.
Although this factor may be considered as evi-
dence of entrapment, it is not conclusive. The
more important determination is whether the
official planted the criminal idea in the mind of
the accused or whether the idea was already
there.
Entrapment is not a constitutionally required
defense, and, consequently, not all states are
bound to provide it as a defense in their criminal
codes. Some states have excluded it as a defense,
reasoning that anyone who can be talked into a
