State v. Enriquez
Court of Appeals of Washington
1DissentRingold, J.
(dissenting)—I respectfully dissent and would reverse. The precise issue presented here, as in most entrapment cases, is whether the defendant had a "predisposition" to commit the crime. State v. Smith, 101 Wn.2d 36, 42, 677 P.2d 100 (1984). This is a factual determination which normally falls within the province of the jury. State v. Pleasant, 38 Wn. App. 78, 80, 684 P.2d 761, review denied, 103 Wn.2d 1006 (1984).
Enriquez argues that the informant's testimony would be helpful to establish his defense of entrapment to the jury, because it would corroborate his testimony as to what occurred.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- State v. CleppeWashington Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. PotterCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1980
- State v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.