Nicholas Tzimopoulos v. United States
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellant challenges on several grounds his conviction by a jury on a one-count indictment charging that he offered a bribe to a public official in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201. We affirm.
Appellant argues that his criminal conduct was “the product of the creative activity of government agents thereby establishing entrapment as a matter of law,” and that, in any case, the trial judge erred in refusing to give a requested instruction on entrapment. We find no merit in either point. 1 Entrapment as a matter of law may be established by undisputed facts that the criminal design originated with…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Glasser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Escobedo v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Sherman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. William Christopher Twigg, Iii, United States of America v. Henry Alfred NevilleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- United States of America, in No. 81-1020 v. Jannotti, Harry P. United States of America, in No. 81-1021 v. Schwartz, George XCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Felix RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- United States v. Peter JodoinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Arthur FeraCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.