The Anomaly of Entrapment

Now in our second decade after 9/11, we are firmly in the prevention era of law enforcement. Faced with the unacceptable consequences of identifying threats too late, government agents are moving aggressively to identify potential terrorists before they strike. Undercover agents and confidential inf...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Roth, Jessica A. (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2014
In:Year: 2014
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a22000002 4500
001 1866126792
003 DE-627
005 20231018043640.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866126792 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866126792 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Roth, Jessica A.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The Anomaly of Entrapment 
264 1 |c 2014 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Now in our second decade after 9/11, we are firmly in the prevention era of law enforcement. Faced with the unacceptable consequences of identifying threats too late, government agents are moving aggressively to identify potential terrorists before they strike. Undercover agents and confidential informants necessarily play a large role in such efforts. As a result of such operations, we have seen a number of cases brought to trial in the federal courts in which defendants have asserted the entrapment defense. To date, the defense has not succeeded. However, as a consequence of these cases, the United States Supreme Court may be required to reconsider the defense for the first time in over twenty years. Thus, now is a good time to re-examine the entrapment defense that the Supreme Court first recognized eighty years ago. This Article argues that the federal entrapment defense represents a doctrinal anomaly that straddles the line between criminal procedure and criminal substance. Understanding how and why the entrapment defense evolved as it did may engender greater sympathy for this much-maligned corner of the criminal law. It could also lead to reforms in the way the defense is administered that would better serve the interests that animate the defense—some sounding in the traditional concerns of substantive criminal law (culpability and dangerousness) and others in the traditional concerns of criminal procedure (deterring overzealous and unwarranted intrusions by government agents) 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/233174479.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
912 |a NOMM 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391807556 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866126792 
LOK |0 005 20231018043640 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69637411 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw