England v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “the accused himself was actually induced to commit the charged offense by the persuasiveness of the police conduct.” Id. at 913 n. 10. Evidence that a person has committed a crime before is some evidence that a subsequent commission of the crime was not induced by police. Id. at 914 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Zarate v. State · Hernandez v. State

2. “[Ejngaged in the conduct charged because he was induced to do so by a law enforcement agent using persuasion or other means likely to cause persons to commit the offense. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Zarate v. State · McGann v. State

3. “The hallmark of a purely objective test for entrapment is the hypothetical person. Once the defendant can show he has been the target of persuasive police conduct, regardless of whether he was in fact persuaded to commit the offense, the focus is directed to the police conduct itself. The question becomes whether the persuasion used by the law enforcement agent was such as to cause a hypothetical person — an ordinarily law abiding person of average resistance — to commit the offense, not whether it was such as to cause the accused himself, given his proclivities, to commit it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Barnes v. State