United States v. Walter Douglas Emmert, United States of America v. Richard Gail Arriaga

How courts have described this case

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

• holding entrapment defense available only where defendant has been directly induced by government agents; derivative entrapment established only where co-defendant who had contact with undercover officer, was an agent of the government at the time of the alleged inducement
• targeting student who attended a cocaine party as one likely to know drug dealers
• targeting student who attended a cocaine party as one likely to know drug dealers
• targeting student who attended a cocaine party as one likely to know drug dealers
• rejecting outrageous conduct claim because \the government was only on one side of the transaction: Powell and Emmert independently arranged the cocaine supply from codefendant Cioe. The government did not fabricate the crime in this case.\
• because threats are “ordinary bargaining tactics in drug deals, government agents may need to engage in such unsavory conduct to maintain their cover”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).