The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Vega, 81 F.3d 171 (9th Cir. 1996):
This court has recognized sentencing entrapment as a legitimate grounds for departing from the guidelines when the record shows that the defendant did not have a predisposition to traffic in the amount ultimately agreed upon, Stauffer, 38 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir.1994), or that the defendant had neither the intent nor the resources to complete the transaction, United States v. Naranjo, 52 F.3d 245 (9th Cir.1995). Although these cases were decided after the defendants were sentenced, the district court made the factual findings that would have been necessary under the new case law. Specifically, the judge found that in regard to sentencing entrapment:
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.