The following excerpt is from United States v. Cortes, D.C. No. 3:10-cr-03617-BEN-1, No. 12-50137 (9th Cir. 2013):
"The entrapment defense has two elements: (1) the defendant was induced to commit the crime by a government agent, and (2) he was not otherwise predisposed to commit the crime." Spentz, 653 F.3d at 818 (citations and quotation marks omitted). "Inducement can be any government conduct creating a substantial risk that an otherwise law-abiding citizen would commit an offense, including persuasion, fraudulent representations, threats, coercive tactics, harassment, promises of reward, or pleas based on need, sympathy or friendship." United States v. Williams, 547 F.3d 1187, 1197 (9th Cir. 2008) (citation and quotation marks omitted). "An inducement consists of an opportunity
Page 11
plus something elsetypically, excessive pressure by the government upon the defendant or the government's taking advantage of an alternative, non-criminal type of motive." United States v. Poehlman, 217 F.3d 692, 701 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
As to the second requirement, the defense of entrapment fails "[i]f the defendant is predisposed to commit the crime." United States v. Smith, 802 F.2d 1119, 1124 (9th Cir. 1986). We have identified five factors to determine whether a defendant was predisposed:
United States v. Busby, 780 F.2d 804, 807 (9th Cir. 1986) (citation omitted). "Although none of these factors is controlling, the defendant's reluctance to engage in criminal activity is the most important." Id.
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.