Arizona Laws 13-206. Entrapment
A. It is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge that the person was entrapped. To claim entrapment, the person must admit by the person’s testimony or other evidence the substantial elements of the offense charged.
Terms Used In Arizona Laws 13-206
- Conduct: means an act or omission and its accompanying culpable mental state. See Arizona Laws 13-105
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- Person: means a human being and, as the context requires, an enterprise, a public or private corporation, an unincorporated association, a partnership, a firm, a society, a government, a governmental authority or an individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property. See Arizona Laws 13-105
- Testimony: Evidence presented orally by witnesses during trials or before grand juries.
B. A person who asserts an entrapment defense has the burden of proving the following by clear and convincing evidence:
1. The idea of committing the offense started with law enforcement officers or their agents rather than with the person.
2. The law enforcement officers or their agents urged and induced the person to commit the offense.
3. The person was not predisposed to commit the type of offense charged before the law enforcement officers or their agents urged and induced the person to commit the offense.
C. A person does not establish entrapment if the person was predisposed to commit the offense and the law enforcement officers or their agents merely provided the person with an opportunity to commit the offense. It is not entrapment for law enforcement officers or their agents merely to use a ruse or to conceal their identity. The conduct of law enforcement officers and their agents may be considered in determining if a person has proven entrapment.