Entrapment is a legal concept that can serve as a full defense to a criminal charge. It applies when government agents go beyond investigation and actually encourage or pressure a person to commit a crime they would not otherwise commit. Courts recognize that the state should not manufacture crimes in order to secure convictions.
To successfully raise an entrapment defense, it is not enough to claim that law enforcement was involved. Two distinct elements must be clearly understood and demonstrated. Failing to meet both requirements may result in a failed defense, regardless of how aggressive the government’s tactics may have been.
1. Government agent inducement must be shown
The first element involves showing that government agents played an active role in persuading or pressuring the defendant to commit the offense. This goes beyond merely offering the opportunity to break the law. Instead, there must be some level of persistent encouragement, coercion or manipulation. Courts have recognized tactics like emotional appeals, promises of significant rewards or exploiting close personal relationships as potential forms of inducement. Merely using deception or posing as someone else in an investigation does not qualify unless it crosses the line into improper pressure. Without inducement, there is no basis for an entrapment defense.
2. Lack of predisposition is critical
Even if inducement is established, the defense will fail unless the second element is also proven. This element requires showing that the defendant was not already willing or inclined to commit the crime. A person who readily agrees to participate in a criminal act, especially without hesitation, may be viewed as predisposed. Courts may also consider past behavior, statements or actions that suggest readiness to break the law. The key question is whether the accused would have committed the offense without the government’s influence. If the evidence shows an existing inclination, the entrapment defense will likely not succeed.
Entrapment is a nuanced defense that hinges on demonstrating both improper government conduct and a lack of criminal inclination. Seeking legal guidance can be helpful in evaluating whether this defense applies to your case.
