People v. Wilson case brief summary
182 N.E.2d 203 (1962)
CASE FACTS
The evidence revealed that one defendant, while in the presence of the other defendant, received money from an undercover police officer and that she used the money to purchase her*in that she gave to the officer. The purchasing defendant alleged the defense of entrapment, however, and claimed that she only purchased the her*in after her friend, an undercover informer, had begged her to in order to alleviate the friend's narcotic withdrawal symptoms. Defense counsel attempted to interview the informer because her testimony was crucial in establishing the entrapment defense. However, the government had arranged for the informer to leave the jurisdiction prior to the trial. Following a bench trial, defendants were both found guilty of unlawfully selling narcotic drugs.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court reversed defendants' convictions and remanded the matter for a new trial.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
182 N.E.2d 203 (1962)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendants appealed from the judgment
of the Criminal Court of Cook County (Illinois) that convicted them
of unlawfully selling narcotic drugs to an undercover police officer.CASE FACTS
The evidence revealed that one defendant, while in the presence of the other defendant, received money from an undercover police officer and that she used the money to purchase her*in that she gave to the officer. The purchasing defendant alleged the defense of entrapment, however, and claimed that she only purchased the her*in after her friend, an undercover informer, had begged her to in order to alleviate the friend's narcotic withdrawal symptoms. Defense counsel attempted to interview the informer because her testimony was crucial in establishing the entrapment defense. However, the government had arranged for the informer to leave the jurisdiction prior to the trial. Following a bench trial, defendants were both found guilty of unlawfully selling narcotic drugs.
DISCUSSION
- In reversing the convictions, the court held that the conduct of the government in sending the informer out of the jurisdiction, and the ruling of the trial court in denying defendants' motion to compel her production, had deprived them of a fair trial.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed defendants' convictions and remanded the matter for a new trial.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment