United States v. Teleguz

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that “sting operations by their nature often involve government manipulation, solicitation, and, at times, deceit”
• stating that “merely giving a defendant an opportunity to commit a crime when the government puts forth an enthusiastic and persistent buyer of illicit goods cannot be improper inducement”
• \[M]erely giving a defendant an opportunity to commit a crime when the government puts forth an enthusiastic and persistent buyer of illicit goods cannot be improper inducement.\
• \Congress could not have intended that its statutes were to be - 21 - enforced by tempting innocent persons into violations.\ (quoting Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369, 372 (1958)). The defense has two prongs: (1) improper government inducement and (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).