First, I need the outline, which is due tomorrow, Wednesday the 31st CST .

Then the Key Assignment, which is due this Sunday, August 4th.

NEED TO FOLLOW AN OUTLINE FORMAT THAT IS SHOWN IN WORD (MICROSOFT WORD PROGRAM HAS SEVERAL OUTLINE TEMPLATES.)

Based on the following information, create a detailed outline for the Key Assignment

DO NOT MERELY REWRITE THE QUESTIONS IN OUTLINE FORM. Also, do not simply outline the assignment scenario. APA Format.

Key Assignment

Scenario: While working an undercover detail in a neighborhood known for drug activity, you notice a vehicle stopped at the intersection waiting for the light to change. The man in the vehicle makes eye contact with you. You approach his vehicle and begin carrying on a conversation with him. You ask him if he needs anything, and he responds by asking you, “What do you have?” You ask him what he is looking for, and he tells you he is looking to score. You show him a small bag containing a white powdery substance; he asks how much, and you respond, “20 dollars.” He hands you a $20 bill, and you give him the bag and tip your hat to signal that the transaction was completed. At this time, the man drives off and is stopped a block away by a marked unit. The individual is placed under arrest for drug possession and purchasing drugs, and he is taken to jail.

The individual is charged with possession of a controlled substance. At his trial, he claimed that he was a victim of entrapment by the police. He was found guilty and sentenced to serve 5 years in jail and given credit for the 3 months he already had served in jail.

Assignment Guidelines

•Address the following in 1,250–1,500 words:

Research and provide 2–3 case briefs on specific case law related to the entrapment defense as it may or may not apply in the case scenario. ◦Your case briefs should follow this format:

◾Title: Title of the selected case

◾Facts: Summary of the events, court timeline, evidence, and so forth

◾Issues: Issues that were present in this case

◾Decisions: The court’s decision and the conclusion to the case

◾Reasoning: The rationale behind the final decision

◾Dissenting opinions: Any dissenting opinions, and an explanation of what they were and why they were raised

Answer the following questions:

◦Did you have probable cause to approach the defendant while he was parked at the traffic light? Why or why not? Defend your answer.

◦Do you feel that the entrapment defense is a valid one, considering the assignment scenario? Why or why not? Defend your answer.

◦Is providing the opportunity for someone to commit a crime the same as entrapment? Why or why not?

If the substance were marijuana, how much would be needed for a misdemeanor charge? A felony?

Be sure to reference all sources using APA style.

Need outline checked, revised, & finished. I have started the outline, but have not finished it.

(TITLE OF OUTLINE) ENTRAPMENT

I. Introduction: Entrapment is when law enforcement officers or their go-betweens encourage or sway an individual to carry out a criminality, which s/he possessed no prior objective to do. If this is the case, the bylaw prohibits a guilty verdict (Sobel, u. d.).

II. Case Number One (FindLaw, u. d.) When law enforcement officers or their go-betweens encourage or sway an individual to carry out a criminality, which s/he possessed no prior objective to do. If this is the case, the bylaw prohibits a guilty verdict II

A. Title: Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992) No. 90-1124

B. Facts: Argued November 6, 1991 Decided April 6, 1992

1. Jacobson ordered two magazines, which contained pictures of unclothed pre-adolescent and adolescent males (when it was not illegal to do so)

2. Government agencies sent Jacobson correspondences via fabricated businesses, and a fake letter writer, in order to investigate his readiness to commit an offence.

3. After 2 1/2 years on the Government mailing list, Jacobson was invited to purchase child pornography

C. Issues:

1. He was arrested after a controlled delivery of a photocopy of the magazine

2. Jacobson pleaded entrapment at his jury trial

3. He was convicted, and the Court of Appeals affirmed

D. Decisions:

1. A reasonable doubt existed that Jacobson had the necessary tendency, prior to the Government’s investigation

2. This existed independent of the Government’s numerous and diverse tactics used on to him, reversed.

E. Reasoning:

1. Because the Government overstepped the line between setting a trap for the “unwary innocent” and the “unwary criminal,” and failed to establish that Jacobson was independently inclined to do the crime that he was arrested

2. Reversed the Court of Appeals’ judgment affirming Jacobson’s conviction.

F. Dissenting opinions:

1. Of the Court’s concern, the bottom line that the Government went too far and “abused” the “`processes of detection and enforcement'”

2. Through enticing an innocent person to violate the law.

3. As a result, the Court holds that the Government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Jacobson was predisposed to commit the crime.

4. it was the jury’s task, to decide if Mr. Jacobson was a willing participant in the criminal activity here or an innocent target

5. There is no dispute that the jury in this case was fully and accurately instructed on the law of entrapment, and nonetheless found Mr. Jacobson guilty.

6. Because the judge believed there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict, he reverentially disagreed/dissented

III. Case Number Two (Justia US Supreme Court Center, u. d)

B. Title: Hampton v. United States – 425 U.S. 484 (1976) No. 74-5822

C. Facts: Argued December 1, 1975. Decided April 27, 1976.

1. As a result of selling to Government agents heroin supplied by a Government informant, petitioner was convicted of a federal offense.

2. The Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting petitioner’s argument that, if the jury believed that the drug was supplied to him by the Government informant he should have been acquitted under the defense of entrapment regardless of his predisposition to commit the crime.

3. Petitioner contends that, although such predisposition renders unavailable an entrapment defense, the Government’s outrageous conduct in supplying him with the contraband denied him due process.

D. Issues: Issues that were present in this case

1. The Government’s supplying of contraband in the course of an investigation

2. The case resulted from two sales of heroin by petitioner to agents of the DEA in St. Louis on February 25 and 26, 1974

3. If you find that the defendant’s sales of narcotics were sales of narcotics supplied to him by an informer in the employ of or acting on behalf of the government, then you must acquit the defendant because the law as a matter of policy forbids his conviction in such a case.

4. Under this particular defense, you need not consider the predisposition of the defendant to commit the offense charged, because if the governmental involvement through its informer reached the point that I have just defined in your own minds, then the predisposition of the defendant would not matter.

E. Decisions:

1. Held: The judgment is affirmed.

2. was convicted of two counts of distributing heroin in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

3. Sentenced to concurrent terms of five years’ imprisonment (suspended).

F. Reasoning:

1. Mr. Justice Rehnquist, joined by The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice White, concluded that, where, as here, the Government agents, the Government informant, and the defendant acted in concert with one another, and the defendant conceded a predisposition to commit the crime in question, not only is the defense of entrapment unavailable but also a violation of due process rights cannot properly be claimed.

2. In order to convict petitioner they had to find that the Government proved “that the defendant knowingly did an act which the law forbids, purposely intending to violate the law.”

G. Dissenting opinions:

1. The heroin, a completely illegal substance, had been supplied entirely by the DEA.

2. The beginning and end of this crime thus coincided exactly with the Government’s entry into and withdrawal from the criminal activity involved in this case

IV. Case No. 3 (The Law Offices of Parviz A. Heshmati, u. d.)

A. Title: United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423 (1973)

B. Facts: Argued February 27, 1973, Decided April 24, 1973 (Summary of the events, court timeline, evidence, and so forth)

C. Issues: Issues that were present in this case

D. Decisions: The court’s decision and the conclusion to the case

E. Reasoning: The rationale behind the final decision

F. Dissenting opinions: Any dissenting opinions, and an explanation of what they were and why they were raised

V. (Change this wording to something else) Was there probable cause to approach the defendant while he was parked at the

traffic light? (‘Lectric Law Library, u. d.)

A. Why or why not? (Change this wording to something else)

B. Defend Your Answer (Change this wording to something else)

VI. (Change this wording to something else) Do I feel that the entrapment defense is a valid one, considering the assignment scenario?

A. Why or why not? (Change this wording to something else)

B. (Change this wording to something else) Defend your answer (Sobel, u. d.)

VII. (Change this wording to something else) Is providing the opportunity for someone to commit a crime the same as entrapment?

A. My answer is, “No, because…”(Leszkay, 2012)

A. Merely furnishing an individual the chance to perform a criminality is not a setup. (Leszkay, 2012)

VII. If the substance were marijuana…

A. How much would be needed for a misdemeanor charge? (Imhoff & Associates, u. d.)

1. Less than one ounce (or 28.5 grams)

B. How much would be needed for a Felony?

1. in almost all states, possession of amounts greater than one kilogram (NOLA, u. d.).

VIII. Conclusion (Change this wording to something else) summary of the paper

IX. References

FindLaw (u. d.). JACOBSON v. UNITED STATES, 503 U.S. 540 (1992). Retrieved

July 29, 2013 from

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=503&invol=540

Imhoff & Associates. (u. d.). MARIJUANA POSSESSION, How Much

Marijuana. Retrieved July 28, 2013from

http://www.criminalattorney.com/Marijuana/possession/

Justia US Supreme Court Center (u. d.). Hampton v. United States – 425 U.S. 484.

Retrieved July 29, 2013 from

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/425/484/case.html

‘Lectric Law Library, (u. d.). ENTRAPMENT. Retrieved July 28, 2013 from

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm

Leszkay, B. (08/30/2012). Does an Undercover Police Officer Have to Answer

When Asked, Are You a Cop? Retrieved from

http://www.criminaldefense lawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense-case/entrapment-police-create-

criminal.htm

NOLA (u. d.). Marijuana Possession: Laws & Penalties. Retrieved July 29, 2013

from

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crimepenalties/federal/Marijuana-Possession.htm

Sobel, D. (u. d.). Entrapment. When the Police Create a Criminal. Retrieved Jul 28,

Sobel, D. (u. d.). Entrapment. When the Police Create a Criminal. Retrieved July 28,

2013 from http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense-

case/entrapment-police-create-criminal.htm

The Law Offices of Parviz A. Heshmati (u. d.). Entrapment Defense. Retrieved July 29,

2013 from

http://www.lasvegascriminal-lawyer.com/Nevada-Criminal-Defense.shtml