Entrapment is a concept that is commonly used in law. There are two types of test that are used to determine entrapment. The first one is the subjective test while the second is an objective test
The subjective test considers the mental status of a suspect at the time when a criminal act was conducted. It also examines the personal characteristics of the individual to find out if the person is capable of committing a crime even without the intervention of law enforcement. The main focus is on the defendant rather than the actions of law enforcement. The criminal records of the defendant are also considered to determine whether a particular case amounts to entrapment or not. If the evaluation of the personal character and criminal records shows that he/she is predisposed to commit a crime, then he/she will be charged whether the law enforcers coerced him/her or not ( State v. Ramirez , 2014). For example, Jack has been previously charged with selling drugs. One day, Ben approached him and asked for a few kilos of cocaine. As he was delivering them, the police appeared and arrested him.He later discovered that Ben was undercover police and he intended to catch him. His attorney argues that this amounts to entrapment. However, under the subjective test, the criminal record of Jack shows that he has been selling drugs. Therefore, Jack is guilty despite Ben’s actions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The objective test, on the other hand, focuses on the actions of law enforcement rather than the defendant. It examines whether the actions by law enforcers may have contributed to the suspect committing the criminal acts or not ( Oyler v. State , 2015) . For example, Jack has been attending a rehabilitation center for the last twelve years. Previously, he was a drug addict, but he has stopped that habit. Ben approaches him claiming that his brother was suffering badly due to lack of drugs. Jack decides to call his former friend and ask for some drugs out of pity. The police catch him in action as he was giving the drugs to Ben. He discovers that Ben is undercover police and his attorney argues that Ben’s actions amount to entrapment. The argument is successful because Ben made a law-abiding person, Jack, to participate in the crime. The Criminal records of Jack are not considered an objective test.
References
State v. Ramirez , No. 33,667 (N.M. Ct. App. Aug. 19, 2014).
Oyler v. State , 162 So. 3d 200 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015).
