doctrine of entrapment

Keith Jacobson, a 56-year-old farmer living in Nebraska, ordered two magazines entitled Bare Boys I and Bare Boys II from a California adult bookstore in February 1984. The magazines contained photographs of nude preteen and teenage boys, which surprised Jacobson as he had expected images of young men 18 years or older. Within three months, Congress enacted the Child Protection Act of 1984, which made the receipt through the mails of sexually explicit depictions of children illegal. Postal inspectors located Jacobson's name on the mailing list of the bookstore that had sent him the magazines and began a series of mailings using fictitious organizations. From January 1985 through May 1987, the Postal Service and Customs Service contacted Jacobson using five fictitious organizations and a bogus pen pal named Carl Long. Jacobson responded to questionnaires from the American Hedonist Society and Heartland Institute for a New Tomorrow, indicating interest in preteen sex materials and teenage sexuality, and corresponded with the pen pal about his preferences for male-male items involving young men in their late teens and early twenties. In March 1987, Jacobson placed an order with a fictitious Canadian company for photographs of young boys engaging in sex, though the order was never filled. In May 1987, he ordered the magazine Boys Who Love Boys from the Far Eastern Trading Company, which depicted young boys in sexual activities, and was arrested following a controlled delivery. Jacobson was indicted on September 24, 1987, for violating 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2)(A). Following a jury trial, he was convicted, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the conviction, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the case.

Defendant Sorrells was indicted on two counts for possessing and selling one-half gallon of whiskey on July 13, 1930, in violation of the National Prohibition Act. He pleaded not guilty and at trial relied on the defense of entrapment. Prohibition agent Martin visited Sorrells' home near Canton, North Carolina, on Sunday, July 13, 1930, accompanied by three local residents who knew Sorrells. Posing as an ex-service man and furniture dealer from Charlotte, Martin asked Sorrells multiple times to obtain liquor, eventually succeeding after invoking their shared World War experiences in the 30th Division; Sorrells returned with a half gallon for which Martin paid five dollars. Sorrells presented testimony from the three companions corroborating the repeated requests and his initial refusals, along with evidence of his steady employment since March 1924 and good character from multiple neighbors. The government offered rebuttal testimony that Sorrells had a reputation as a rum-runner, but introduced no evidence of any prior liquor transactions by him. The trial court denied a motion for directed verdict, refused to submit the entrapment issue to the jury, and ruled as a matter of law that there was no entrapment. Following a guilty verdict, the court sentenced Sorrells to eighteen months' imprisonment, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari limited to the question whether the evidence was sufficient to go to the jury upon the issue of entrapment.

In January 2003, petitioner Keshia Dixon purchased multiple firearms at two gun shows. During the purchases, she provided an incorrect address and falsely stated that she was not under indictment for a felony. Dixon was indicted and convicted on one count of receiving a firearm while under indictment in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(n). She was also convicted on eight counts of making false statements in connection with the acquisition of a firearm in violation of § 922(a)(6). At trial she admitted that she knew she was under indictment when she made the purchases and that she knew doing so was a crime. Her defense was that she acted under duress because her boyfriend threatened to kill her or hurt her daughters if she did not buy the guns for him. In her request for jury instructions on the duress defense, Dixon asked that she have the burden of production and that the Government then be required to disprove duress beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court, finding itself bound by Fifth Circuit precedent, denied the request. Instead, the court instructed the jury that Dixon had the burden of proof to establish the defense of duress by a preponderance of the evidence. After her conviction, the Court of Appeals rejected Dixon's contention that the instructions were erroneous. Given contrary treatment by other federal courts, the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

On July 12, 1992, respondent James Egelhoff was camping in the Yaak region of northwestern Montana with Roberta Pavola and John Christenson to pick mushrooms. The three sold the mushrooms they had collected and spent the rest of the day and evening drinking in bars and at a private party in Troy, Montana. After leaving the party after 9 p.m. in Christenson's 1974 Ford Galaxy station wagon, the drinking continued, as Egelhoff was seen buying beer at 9:20 p.m. and recalled passing a bottle of Black Velvet with Christenson. Around midnight, officers of the Lincoln County sheriff's department discovered the station wagon stuck in a ditch along U.S. Highway 2. Pavola and Christenson were in the front seat, each dead from a single gunshot to the head. Egelhoff lay in the rear of the car, alive and yelling obscenities, with a blood-alcohol content of .36 percent measured over an hour later. His .38-caliber handgun lay on the floor near the brake pedal with four loaded rounds and two empty casings, and he had gunshot residue on his hands. Egelhoff was charged with two counts of deliberate homicide under Montana law requiring that he purposely or knowingly caused the deaths of another human being. At trial he claimed an unidentified fourth person must have committed the murders, that his extreme intoxication rendered him physically incapable of committing them, and that it accounted for his inability to recall the events. The trial court instructed the jury pursuant to Mont. Code Ann. § 45-2-203 that it could not consider respondent's intoxicated condition in determining the existence of a mental state which is an element of the offense. The jury found Egelhoff guilty on both counts and the court sentenced him to 84 years' imprisonment. The Supreme Court of Montana reversed the convictions. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

David and Ginger Twitchell were the parents of Robyn Twitchell, who died on April 8, 1986, at the age of two and one-half years. Robyn's death resulted from peritonitis caused by the perforation of his bowel, which had been obstructed as a result of an anomaly known as Meckel's diverticulum. Evidence presented at trial indicated that this condition could be corrected by surgery with a high success rate. The Twitchells are practicing Christian Scientists who grew up in Christian Science families and believe in healing by spiritual treatment. During Robyn's five-day illness from Friday, April 4, through Tuesday, April 8, they retained a Christian Science practitioner, a Christian Science nurse, and at one time consulted with Nathan Talbot, who held a position in the church known as the Committee on Publication. As a result of that consultation, David Twitchell read a church publication concerning the legal rights and obligations of Christian Scientists in Massachusetts. That publication quoted a portion of G.L. c. 273, § 1, as then amended, which accepted remedial treatment by spiritual means alone as satisfying any parental obligation not to neglect a child or to provide a child with physical care. The Twitchells appealed their convictions of involuntary manslaughter, and the Supreme Judicial Court granted their request for direct appellate review.