http://www.oyez.org/issues/criminal-procedure/entrapment/ U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, presented by The Oyez Project (www.oyez.org) en-us <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_74_5822/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_90_1124/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_84/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_86_6109/ <p>No details yet.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1950-1959/1957/1957_87/ <p>Does an undercover law enforcement officer's participation in criminal conduct constitute entrapment in violation of the Fifth Amendment's due process protections?</p><p>Not always. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that law enforcement officers may participate in the procedural commission of certain crimes such as drug manufacturing, so long as they do not implant criminal designs in the minds of the accused. In Russell's case, the investigated drug operations were in place long before undercover agents infiltrated them. Moreover, the ingredients contributed by the agents could have been acquired independently by Russell and his co-conspirators. As such, none of the agents' participatory activities amounted to entrapment.</p> http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1972/1972_71_1585/