DEA Defense Attorneys Discuss Using Entrapment Defenses for Drug Crimes

Table of Contents

DEA Defense Attorneys Discuss Using Entrapment Defenses for Drug Crimes

Defense attorneys who represent clients facing drug charges from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) have an important but challenging task. The government invests significant resources into building drug cases and proving guilt. However, experienced criminal defense lawyers understand how to mount an aggressive defense, even when the facts seem stacked against their client.One potential defense that may apply in some DEA drug cases is entrapment. This refers to situations where undercover agents or informants convince or coerce the target into committing a crime they otherwise wouldn’t have. While not applicable in every case, entrapment can be an effective defense when properly applied.

How Entrapment Works in Drug Cases

The legal definition of entrapment involves two key elements, as established through court precedents over the years:

The idea to commit the crime came from government agents, not the defendant.
The defendant was not already predisposed to commit the type of crime before the government intervention.

This means that if an undercover DEA agent kept hounding a reluctant target to sell them drugs, until they finally gave in, that could potentially be entrapment. But if the target showed an existing willingness to deal drugs, then entrapment likely won’t apply even if the DEA introduced the opportunity.The burden is on the defendant to show they were entrapped, not on the prosecution to show they weren’t. But skilled criminal defense lawyers know how to gather the necessary evidence and frame the argument to show improper conduct by the DEA or informants.

Why Entrapment Defenses Are Difficult in Drug Cases

While entrapment remains a valid defense in appropriate cases, it can be challenging to pursue for several reasons:

Subjective focus – Courts look at the defendant’s predisposition to commit the crime. But low-level drug dealers may have criminal histories that undermine claims of innocence.
Sting operations – Long-term DEA investigations often use informants to befriend targets and draw them into drug deals. This makes entrapment harder to prove.
Available defenses – Simple denial of guilt or attacking procedural errors may seem easier defenses than claiming entrapment.
Burden of proof – Defendants must present compelling evidence of entrapment, while the prosecution only needs to introduce reasonable doubt.

Because of these difficulties, some defense lawyers avoid entrapment arguments in drug cases altogether. But skilled criminal litigators know how to navigate these challenges and build a strong entrapment defense when warranted.

Effective Strategies for Using Entrapment in DEA Drug Cases

While every drug case has unique facts, there are some overarching strategies defense attorneys use to develop entrapment defenses in DEA prosecutions:

Focus on inducement – Show through recorded conversations, texts, emails, and testimony how the DEA or informants aggressively pushed the target into dealing drugs. Portray the defendant as reluctant and coaxed into crime.
Highlight vulnerabilities – Factors like youth, financial distress, lack of education, or mental health issues can help demonstrate the target was susceptible to pressure from agents.
Attack informant credibility – Informants often have criminal histories themselves and incentives to produce results for the DEA. Their credibility can be challenged.
Frame larger context – For low-level crimes, show the defendant was entrapped into a larger sting outside their normal behavior.
Leverage pre-trial motions – File motions to dismiss for outrageous government conduct or entrapment as a matter of law before trial.
Use experts – Retain psychologists to assess if the defendant showed a predisposition for this type of crime. Expert testimony can help establish entrapment.
Emphasize burden – Remind the jury the defense only needs to show a reasonable possibility of entrapment, not prove it beyond doubt.

Key Court Rulings on Entrapment in Drug Crimes

While entrapment laws vary somewhat between states, federal court rulings help shape standards for DEA drug stings across the country. Here are some notable precedents:

Sorrells v. United States (1932) – This SCOTUS case established the “origin of intent” test for entrapment. If intent came from government agents, entrapment may apply.

1
Sherman v. United States (1958) – The Supreme Court found entrapment where a government informant repeatedly asked the defendant for drugs until he complied.

2
United States v. Russell (1973) – The Court ruled that an undercover drug agent supplying an ingredient for meth didn’t constitute entrapment.

3
Mathews v. United States (1988) – The Supreme Court rejected a claim of entrapment where the defendant promptly agreed to help an undercover agent buy drugs.

4
Jacobson v. United States (1992) – The Court found entrapment where the government spent 2.5 years coaxing an otherwise law-abiding citizen to purchase child pornography.

5

These and other rulings help define the boundaries of entrapment law. Experienced defense lawyers stay up-to-date on precedents that may bolster their case arguments.

Why Consult an Experienced DEA Defense Attorney

Given the complexities around pursuing an entrapment defense, it is essential to work with a seasoned DEA defense lawyer if facing federal drug charges. A knowledgeable attorney will evaluate the specifics of your case and advise you honestly on whether entrapment could lead to acquittal or dismissal. If viable, they will craft a meticulous argument rooted in the nuances of entrapment law.Even if entrapment doesn’t seem applicable, you still need an attorney who knows how to aggressively contest the prosecution’s evidence, expose sloppy police work, and raise all possible objections to constitutional violations. This can lead to acquittals or charges being reduced or dropped. Don’t leave your fate to chance – consult a trusted DEA defense lawyer immediately if facing drug charges.