|
|
|
| Entrapment |
|
United States v. Garcia,
No. 04-8012 (June 15, 2005) (Published): Guilty plea on charge of interstate transportation of child pornography. The Circuit rejected claims of improper application of a cross-reference in the Guidelines and "sentence manipulation" by the cops (it is an internet chartroom case where the cops act like a parent with children); but remanded for re-sentencing under Booker when the Government conceded the error.
|
|
|
Leech v. State,
2003 OK CR 4, 66 P.3d 987. The case is an oddity because Leech did not raise the defense at trial; rather, the enterprising appellate lawyer, Mary S. Bruehl, raised it for the first time on appeal and the Court addressed it (although it applied plain error, which Leech was unable to meet). So, no relief for Leech, but a shot at relief for others. Also notable because now-disgraced Judge Lile authored the opinion and Lumpkin actually concurred.
|
|
|
United States v. Luisi,
No. 03-1470 (1st Cir., April 10, 2007): Entrapment: This case involves Luisi who is described as an admitted member of the "La Cosa Nostra" crime family and who was convicted on three cocaine-related charges. At trial, Luisi testified and admitted his involvement in the cocaine transactions, but defended on the grounds of entrapment, arguing that the FBI informant tried to induce him to commit the drug crimes and, when he balked, the informant persuaded a boss in Philly to order Luisi to conduct the drug transactions. The Government was aware of the "serious consequences" Luisi would face if refused to follow the order of the boss. HELD: Reversed because, although the District Court instructed the jury on the entrapment defense, its supplemental instruction in response to a jury question "foreclosed the jury from considering the role of the Philly boss in the asserted government entrapment." This opinion contains a good discussion on the entrapment defense in general and on the concept of "third party entrapment" or "vicarious entrapment."
|
|
|
|
