Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Blais

U.S. Army Court of Military Review

Decided June 28, 1985No. CM 445795Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFelder, Judge

I agree the objective entrapment or due process defense was not available to appellant and his pleas of guilty were properly accepted by the military judge.

Ten years ago in United States v. Hebert, 1 M.J. 84 (C.M.A.1975), the United States Court of Military Appeals held that objective entrapment would exist as a matter of law where government agents provide the contraband which ultimately form the basis for a controlled purchase by the government. Id. at 85 n. 3. A year later in Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484, 96 S.Ct. 1646, 48 L.Ed.2d 113 (1976), the United States Supreme Court…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Missouri v. HunterSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. United States v. BakerUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
  4. United States v. DossUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1983
  5. United States v. VanzandtUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API