Entrapment; Reprehensible conduct; Distinguishing People v Johnson (Unpub)

In this interlocutory appeal, the court concluded that it was “not left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court made a mistake by denying defendant’s motion to dismiss on entrapment grounds.” She was charged with delivery of meth. Her charge stemmed “from her communications with an undercover officer and her attempted sale of” meth to him. “As part of their communications leading up to the attempted sale, the officer offered defendant a fabricated employment application.” Defendant argued “the trial court clearly erred by denying her motion to dismiss because the officer entrapped her into the attempted sale by the condition of the potential employment[,]” and that this conduct was reprehensible. The court held that the evidence “demonstrated the officer provided her with the opportunity to commit a crime, and defendant took that opportunity of her own free will.” It also concluded that “his conduct merely furnished an opportunity for defendant to commit a crime,” “and the use of deceptive tactics was permissible[.]” Affirmed.