Salt Lake Criminal Defense Attorney Utah
Call Criminal Defense Attorney in Utah
Call Utah Criminal Lawyer
Veteran Criminal Defense Lawyer / Former Prosecutor
Call 801-449-1409 now to see what our team can do for you.
Utah Criminal Defense Lawyer Salt Lake City

Criminal Defense Solutions Start HereSM

Contact Us

Utah Criminal Defense - Salt Lake Criminal Attorney

Utah Code 76-2-303 - Entrapment as Affirmative Defense

Under Utah Code 76-2-303, a person may be found not guilty of a crime if the defendant was “entrapped into committing the offense.” Entrapment is considered to be an affirmative defense. If the elements of an entrapment defense are met, it can be a complete defense to a criminal charge and can result in a not guilty verdict at trial.

Elements of Entrapment under Utah Law

Utah’s entrapment law requires evidence that a police officer (or a person who was acting in cooperation with or under the direction of the officer) induced the defendant to commit the crime, for the purpose of obtaining evidence to prosecute the defendant for that crime.

The methods used by the officer must be so compelling that they create a substantial risk the offense would be committed, and that the defendant would not otherwise be ready to commit the crime. If the officer’s conduct merely provides the defendant with the opportunity to commit a crime, then the elements of entrapment are not established.

Consider the following hypothetical example:

An undercover police officer sees an 18-year-old person at a party where alcohol is being served. The officer simply asks, "Do you want a beer?" The 18-year-old subject (who has a history of frequent underage drinking) readily accepts the offer.

The defendant in this example could be charged with possession of alcohol by a minor. The officer has not used overly-compelling methods of inducement. Further, the defendant in this example appears to have been otherwise ready to commit the crime. An entrapment defense would likely not be successful.

Consider, however, the following alternate scenario:

The undercover police officer's invitation to have a beer is initially declined. The defendant explains politely that he has quit drinking because it is illegal at the age of 18, and he is trying to turn his life around. The officer points out that "everyone else is doing it" and that the defendant will "look like a loser" if he doesn't have a drink. The defendant still declines the offer, and tries to walk away. The officer moves in front of the defendant, and now challenges his masculinity, stating that if the defendant were a "real man" that he would not be afraid to have a drink. When the defendant still refuses, the officer then encourages the other party-goers to start chanting "chicken, chicken" until the defendant finally agrees and takes a small sip of beer.

In this alternate scenario, a judge or jury could find that the police officer's conduct created "a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by one not otherwise ready to commit it." The officer's conduct goes far beyond "merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense." (Note also that in the above scenario, the police officer could also be charged with a crime for providing alcohol to a minor.)

Exceptions to Entrapment Rules - Violence

Entrapment cannot be used as a defense to charges that include a causing or threatening bodily injury to another as an element of the crime charged. While it is theoretically possible that a police officer might try to entrap a defendant to commit a violent crime, the Utah legislature appears to have made a public policy decision to disallow such a defense.

Alternate Defenses

Under Utah law, an entrapment defense is technically available even if the defendant denies committing the crime that has been charged. In other words, a defendant can present two alternate defenses: 1) the first defense is that the defendant did not commit the crime; 2) the second alternate defense is that, if the jury finds that the defendant did commit the crime, it was committed only because the police engaged in entrapment.

Raising alternate defenses like this in a criminal case is difficult and risky. In essence, a defendant must argue both that he did commit the criminal act (under entrapment) and that he did not commit the criminal act. While such arguments are legally valid, a jury may be inclined to view this as legalistic double talk and find the defendant guilty. Careful consultation with an experienced criminal defense attorney is strongly advised before attempting to utilize this defense strategy.

Procedural Issues in Presenting an Entrapment Defense in Utah

Under Utah Code 76-2-303, a defendant is entitled to raise the defense of entrapment twice: once to the judge, and a second time to a jury.

If the defendant makes a formal written motion, at least ten days before trial (absent a showing of good cause for a later filing), the judge is required to hold a hearing and take evidence on the question of whether the defendant was entrapped to commit the offense. If the court finds that as a matter of fact and a matter of law the defendant was entrapped, then the court is required to dismiss the case with prejudice (meaning that it cannot be re-filed). While this finding by the court results in an order dismissing the case with prejudice, this is an order that can be appealed by the prosecutor. If, after appellate review is complete, the order is reversed, the defendant may still be required to stand trial on the original charges.

If a judge determines that the defendant was not in fact entrapped, or if the dismissal is reversed on appeal, the defendant is still entitled to raise the issue of entrapment at trial. At trial, the issue of entrapment is treated as an affirmative defense. If evidence is presented either by the defense or by the prosecutor that tends to show entrapment, then the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped.

Relevance of a Defendant's Prior Criminal Record in an Entrapment Defense

In raising a defense of entrapment, one relevant issue is whether the defendant was already inclined to commit the crime. Evidence of a defendant's prior criminal convictions is generally not admissible, except where the defendant testifies at trial. When a defendant testifies, Utah's entrapment law allows a prosecutor to ask about prior felony convictions that the defendant may have. The defendant can also be questioned for impeachment purposes about prior testimony given by the defendant at an entrapment hearing before a judge.

Finding a Utah Criminal Defense Attorney in Salt Lake City

Salt Lake Defense AttorneyThe assistance of a good criminal defense attorney can be vital to a successful defense strategy in any case. But if you are contemplating raising a defense of entrapment, it is especially important to have to have an experienced lawyer on your side.

Utah criminal defense attorney Stephen Howard has successfully protected his clients rights in a wide variety of felony and misdemeanor criminal cases, ranging from violent felonies to white collar crime, from homicide to DUI, and virtually everything in between. Based in Salt Lake City, Mr. Howard offers legal services to clients throughout Utah.

Contact us today to arrange for an initial confidential consultation.

RELATED CRIMINAL CODE SECTIONS
Utah Code 76-2-302 - Compulsion as an Affirmative Defense
Utah Code 76-2-202 - Accomplice Liability

More Utah Criminal Code Provisions


Best Rating
Make a Payment to Your Account
Get Help Now
** All fields are required. **
Name: Email: Phone: Describe your legal needs here:
I accept the disclaimer below.
Disclaimer: No attorney-client relationship is established by the use of this form. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be submitted through this form. By clicking 'submit' I am only requesting that I be contacted for the purpose of obtaining legal services.

This form protected by reCAPTCHA.

  • Selected Victories
  • Criminal Defense AttorneyDismissed - Charges of insurance fraud were brought when investigators found reason to believe that client's claim of injury was fraudulent. Client was seen kicking a soccer ball, and investigators concluded that the injury claim was false. By obtaining medical records and other administrative records, and by pointing out to the prosecutor that the alleged injury interferred with the client's ability to lift - not his ability to kick a ball - the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case.
  • Drug Crimes Defense Attorney Utah Dismissed - Client was facing multiple cases involving first-degree felony drug distribution charges for allegedly selling to a confidential informant. Defense analysis of the case revealed fatal flaws in the prosecution case that ultimately resulted in a complete dismissal of all cases and charges.
  • Utah 402 Reduction Attorney Felony Reduced - Client with prior felony conviction was granted a 402 reduction to the misdemeanor level over the objection of the prosecutor. Based on information provided to the court in support of the defense motion, the judge ruled in favor of the defense.
  • Felony Attorney Utah Dismissed - Client facing first-degree felony charge and possible life in prison for child kidnapping. Full defense analysis of the case revealed critical legal flaws in the prosecution's case. When confronted with the defense legal analysis, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case outright without trial.
Best Utah Criminal Defense Strategy

Successfully defending against criminal prosecution requires more than just an 'aggressive' defense. The best defense attorneys understand that a sophisticated defense requires a thorough understanding of a variety of nuanced legal issues, real experience in the courtroom, good negotiation skills, and much more. Fighting hard is good. Fighting smart is better....

Strategy »
Salt Lake Criminal Defense Attorney Profile Utah

Finding the right criminal defense lawyer for you Utah criminal case will be one of the most important decision you make. Before hiring any lawyer, there are a number of important factors to consider. The person you select as your criminal defense attorney will be responsible to defend your case and protect your rights....

Experience »
Conviction Consequences in Utah Criminal Prosecutions

Jail time, prison time, thousands of dollars in fines, and the lifetime collateral consequences of having a criminal conviction on your record - all of these and more are at stake when you are facing criminal prosecution in Utah. Understanding what is at risk is critical. Even so-called "minor" misdemeanor cases can have serious consequences....

Consequences »
Criminal Defense Attorney in Utah - Reasons to Hope

Clients sometimes ask what the "worst case scenario" is for their charges. We prefer to take a more positive approach. Facing criminal prosecution in Utah can have serious consequences. But you can take steps and make choices right now that will improve your chances of a positive outcome. Let us help you....

Reasons to Hope »
Home | Attorney Profile | Case Results | Criminal Code | FAQ | Legal Resources | Defense Strategy | Contact Us

Serving Salt Lake, Davis, Weber, Utah, Cache, Tooele, Summit, Box Elder, and Wasatch Counties, and all of Utah.

Attorney Stephen Howard practices as part of the Canyons Law Group, LLC and Stephen W. Howard, PC.

Offices in Salt Lake and Davis Counties
340 East 400 South, Suite 25, Salt Lake City, UT 84111
952 S. Main St., Suite A, Layton, UT 84041

Call now to arrange for a confidential initial consultation with an experienced and effective Utah criminal defense lawyer.

In Salt Lake City, call 801-449-1409.
In Davis County, call 801-923-4345.

Stephen W. Howard, PC

The materials in this website are intended for informational purposes only, and are not legal advice. Viewing or responding to materials in this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Read Full Disclaimer.