The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Reynolds, 992 F.2d 1220 (9th Cir. 1993):
There is an unresolved split in this circuit as to whether the refusal to give an entrapment instruction is reviewed for abuse of discretion or de novo. United States v. Sotelo-Murillo, 887 F.2d 176, 179-80 (9th Cir.1989). However, under either standard the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on entrapment.
"A defendant is entitled to an entrapment instruction if he or she can present some evidence that ... a government agent induced him or her to commit an illegal act." Id. at 179. That done, the burden shifts to the government to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was disposed to commit the criminal act prior to first being approached by Government agents." Jacobson v. United States, 112 S.Ct. 1535, 1540 (1992).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.