Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

In order to use the entrapment defense, does the defendant ALWAYS have to be aware that an officer is an officer?

The main scenario I'm unsure about is if an undercover officer manages to persuade somebody that a crime they are about to commit is perfectly legal and then the person goes out and commits this crime completely relying on the undercover officer's assurances that the act was legal. Will the defendant be able to use the entrapment defense even if they didn't know the undercover was an officer? I ask because I know that you normally take other peoples' advice at your own peril, but considering that the undercover is an officer of the law does that make a difference? and are they allowed to lie to THAT EXTENT?

thanks.


Asked on 7/03/10, 6:58 pm

2 Answers from Attorneys
Michael Stone Law Offices of Michael B. Stone Toll Free 1-855-USE-MIKE

The entrapment defense requires that the defendant not have been disposed to commit the crime but for the encouragement of the officer. Whether or not the defendant knows the individual is a police officer makes no difference. Undercover cops are free to talk to anybody and use any information they receive.

Read more
Answered on 7/04/10, 2:23 am
Anthony Roach Law Office of Anthony A. Roach

You are mixing up two different areas of law. As Mr. Stone points out, knowledge of the identify of the person as a police officer is not an element of the defense. The issue is whether the police used some form of improper coercion that would induce a normally law abiding citizen to commit a criminal act. A guarantee that the act is not illegal would be a factor.

On the other hand, relying on an opinion of a police officer that something is not illegal has been found to be insufficient in the past to support a "mistake of law" defense.

Read more
Answered on 7/04/10, 1:00 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in California