What Is an Entrapment Defense in Cincinnati, OH?

A person facing criminal prosecution in Cincinnati may have various legal defenses they can raise against their charges. One of the rarer defenses used in criminal cases includes the entrapment defense. In an entrapment defense, a defendant claims that law enforcement or other government officials actively induced them to commit a crime they otherwise had no inclination to commit. An entrapment defense can serve as a complete defense to criminal liability even though the defendant may have committed the alleged acts. 

Understanding the Entrapment Defense

In Ohio, a defendant may pursue an entrapment defense when “the criminal design originates with [government officials], and they implant in the mind of an innocent person the disposition to commit the alleged offense and induce its commission to prosecute” the person. A successful entrapment defense requires the defendant to establish several elements:

• They had no prior intent or disposition to commit the alleged criminal offense before government officials contacted them
• The government officials induce the defendant to commit the charged offense
• The officials induce the defendant to commit the offense to have grounds to prosecute the defendant

The law differentiates between government officials merely providing a defendant with an “opportunity” to commit a crime versus “inducing” the defendant to commit the crime. For example, law enforcement may provide a defendant with an opportunity to commit a crime during an investigation when they arrange for a controlled buy using an undercover police officer or confidential informant who purchases contraband from the defendant. Inducing a defendant requires more than merely providing the opportunity to commit the offense; government officials may induce a defendant by cajoling or encouraging the defendant when they express an initial unwillingness to commit the crime, supplying the defendant with the means to commit the crime, or coercing the defendant to commit the crime through threats or other undue influence.

Most importantly, a successful entrapment defense means proving that the defendant had no prior intention or inclination to commit the crime. A defendant’s entrapment defense may fail if the jury or judge finds that the defendant would have committed the crime without the opportunity provided by the government or if a party other than government officials offered the opportunity. 

How the Entrapment Defense Works

The law considers entrapment an “affirmative” defense. The prosecution normally bears the burden of proof in a criminal case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed every element of a charged offense. As a result, a criminal defendant usually has no obligation to present any evidence since the burden of proof rests solely with the prosecution. However, asserting an affirmative defense creates an obligation for the defendant to introduce evidence proving the defense applies.

In most cases, a defendant must explicitly assert the entrapment defense and present some evidence to support it for the trial court to instruct the jury on its applicability. Unlike the prosecution’s burden of proof, a defendant must only prove an entrapment defense by a preponderance of the evidence. 

Entrapment vs. Lawful Police Tactics

Although many defendants may feel “duped” by police into committing a crime, law enforcement agencies have various lawful tactics to catch people disposed to commit crimes in the act of an offense. For example, police may lawfully use “sting” operations to catch criminals, such as using undercover police officers to pose as sex workers to catch individuals attempting to solicit prostitution, setting up fake online profiles to attract people attempting to communicate with minors to arrange sexual activity, or using confidential informants to arrange and conduct controlled buys of drugs or illegal weapons.

However, when police go beyond merely presenting an individual with an opportunity to commit a crime, the investigators’ actions may stray into entrapment. Tactics involving pressure, threats, coercion, or encouragement to a person who repeatedly and forcefully resists committing the crime may support an entrapment defense. 

Challenges in Raising an Entrapment Defense

Unfortunately, entrapment ranks as one of the most challenging defenses to prove in a criminal case. People typically do not engage in criminal activity without a prior inclination to do so, requiring a defendant asserting an entrapment defense to present compelling evidence that the idea for the crime came from government officials, who encouraged the defendant to follow through with the crime. Presenting an entrapment defense can also have other legal complications for a defendant’s case. Some of the difficulties defendants may face in successfully pursuing an entrapment defense include:

• Proving lack of disposition: Proving that one did not intend to commit a crime until contacted by government officials can become challenging due to the inherent difficulties of proving a negative. However, various facts may support finding a defendant’s lack of criminal disposition, such as their lack of criminal history, the fact that the idea for the crime came from government officials, how forcefully the defendant resisted the idea, and how quickly they ultimately agreed to participate.
• Proving inducement versus mere opportunity: Many entrapment defenses fail due to a lack of evidence showing that law enforcement officials went beyond merely offering the opportunity to commit a crime and instead cajoled or coerced the defendant into committing a crime they otherwise would not have.
• Potential admission to committing the crime: Cases at the state and federal level involving entrapment defenses have offered differing interpretations on whether a defendant can assert an entrapment defense while denying involvement in the crime. An entrapment defense involves an implicit admission by a defendant that they committed the alleged acts. 

Contact Our Firm Today to Discuss Your Legal Options

When the police have arrested and charged you with a crime they induced you to commit, you may have a viable entrapment defense that can help you avoid criminal liability. Asserting an entrapment defense involves complex factual and legal issues. You need an experienced Cincinnati criminal defense lawyer who can evaluate the viability of an entrapment defense under the facts of your case and help you present compelling evidence and arguments at trial if you choose to assert the defense.

Call Moermond & Mulligan, LLC today at (513) 421-9790 or contact us online for a free, confidential consultation with our legal team to discuss your options for pursuing a favorable resolution to your criminal charges in Cincinnati, OH.

Related Posts:

How Common Are Forensic Lab Errors in Ohio Criminal Cases?

Can I Sue for Being Falsely Accused of Sexual Assault?

Failure to Register as a Sex Offender Penalties

7 Signs That a DUI Case Is Weak in Cincinnati, OH

Top Reasons People Get a DUI on Christmas and Winter Holidays