Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
50 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1939–2026 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2026See State v. Smith, 101 Wn.2d 36, 43 , 677 P.2d 100 (1984) (To prevail on an entrapment defense, “[f]irst, the defendant must demonstrate that he was tricked or induced into committing the crime by acts of trickery by law enforcement agents. 2026See State v. Smith, 101 Wn.2d 36, 43 , 677 P.2d 100 (1984) (To prevail on an entrapment defense, “[f]irst, the defendant must demonstrate that he was tricked or induced into committing the crime by acts of trickery by law enforcement agents. | 3 | 6 |
State v. Arbogastgreen2 sentences2026Our Supreme Court has held “that to obtain an entrapment instruction, defendants must make a prima facie showing that (1) the crime originated in the mind of the police or an informant and (2) the defendant is induced to commit a crime that [they were] not predisposed to commit.” State v. Arbogast, 199 Wn.2d 356 , 360, 506 P.3d 1238 (2022) (citing RCW 9A.16.070(1)). 2026Our Supreme Court has held “that to obtain an entrapment instruction, defendants must make a prima facie showing that (1) the crime originated in the mind of the police or an informant and (2) the defendant is induced to commit a crime that [they were] not predisposed to commit.” State v. Arbogast, 199 Wn.2d 356 , 360, 506 P.3d 1238 (2022) (citing RCW 9A.16.070(1)). | 3 | 5 |
Mathews v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2019In Mathews, the Supreme Court held that a defendant can assert the inconsistent affirmative defense of entrapment while also denying the commission of the offense as long as the entrapment defense was supported by sufficient evidence. 485 U.S. at 63 . 2007App. at 837 ; see also Mathews, 485 U.S. at 62 (holding that “even if the defendant denies one or more elements of the crime, he is entitled to an entrapment instruction whenever there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find entrapment”). | 3 | 5 |
State v. Trujillogreen2 sentences2024First, the court noted that in order to be entitled to an entrapment instruction, the defendant must “ ‘admit facts which, if proved, would constitute [a] crime.’ ” Id., slip op. at 22 (quoting State v. Galisia, 63 Wn. App. 833, 837 , 822 P.2d 303 (1992), abrogated on other grounds by Trujillo, 75 Wn. App. at 913 ). 2023Two years later, Division One disavowed Galisia in Trujillo, holding that in order to be entitled to an entrapment instruction “a defendant must present evidence which would be sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to conclude that the defendant has established the defense of entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence.” Trujillo, 75 Wn. | 2 | 9 |
State v. Waggonergreen2 sentences2020See id. and see Smith, 101 Wn.2d at 42-43 (“A police informant’s use of ‘a normal amount of persuasion to overcome’ and ‘expected resistance’ to sell drugs ‘does not constitute entrapment and will not justify an entrapment instruction.’” (quoting Waggoner, 80 Wn.2d at 11 )). 13 Lysergic acid diethylamide. 38 No. 36250-7-III State v. Arbogast No Washington decision has analyzed a “normal amount of persuasion” that induces adults to rape children. 2020See id. and see Smith, 101 Wn.2d at 42-43 (“A police informant’s use of ‘a normal amount of persuasion to overcome’ and ‘expected resistance’ to sell drugs ‘does not constitute entrapment and will not justify an entrapment instruction.’” (quoting Waggoner, 80 Wn.2d at 11 )). 13 Lysergic acid diethylamide. 38 No. 36250-7-III State v. Arbogast No Washington decision has analyzed a “normal amount of persuasion” that induces adults to rape children. | 2 | 3 |
Boyde v. Californiagreen2 sentences1998See Boyde v. California, 494 U.S. 370, 380 , 110 S. Ct. 1190 , 108 L. 1998See Boyde v. California, 494 U.S. 370, 380 , 110 S. Ct. 1190 , 108 L. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Livelygreen2 sentences2022Smith, 101 Wn.2d at 43 ; Lively, 130 Wn.2d at 10 . 2020Because we affirm the denial of the entrapment instruction on other grounds, we need not address this contention. 9 government conduct itself amounted to criminal activity or conduct ‘repugnant to a sense of justice.’” Lively, 130 Wn.2d at 22 (quoting People v. Isaacson, 44 N.Y.2d 511 , 378 N.E.2d 78 , 406 N.Y.S.2d 714 , 719 (1978)). | 1 | 4 |
State v. Graygreen2 sentences1994An officer’s use "of a normal amount of persuasion to overcome this expected resistance [to selling drugs] does not constitute entrapment and will not justify an entrapment instruction.” State v. Waggoner, 80 Wn.2d 7, 11 , 490 P.2d 1308 (1971); see also State v. Smith, 101 Wn.2d 36, 42-43 , 677 P.2d 100 (1984). "[A]n officer may, when acting in good faith, make use of deception, trickery or artifice.” State v. Gray, 69 Wn.2d 432, 434 , 418 P.2d 725 (1966). 1994An officer’s use "of a normal amount of persuasion to overcome this expected resistance [to selling drugs] does not constitute entrapment and will not justify an entrapment instruction.” State v. Waggoner, 80 Wn.2d 7, 11 , 490 P.2d 1308 (1971); see also State v. Smith, 101 Wn.2d 36, 42-43 , 677 P.2d 100 (1984). "[A]n officer may, when acting in good faith, make use of deception, trickery or artifice.” State v. Gray, 69 Wn.2d 432, 434 , 418 P.2d 725 (1966). | 1 | 4 |
In re Meippengreen2 sentences2023See Meippen, 193 Wn.2d at 317 (merely showing that an error created a possibility of prejudice is insufficient for collateral relief). 2023See Meippen, 193 Wn.2d at 315-17 (actual and substantial prejudice standard is higher than “some evidence”). | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Rafael Perez-Leon & Juan Gonzalezgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Rundquistgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Joe Fedroff. Appeal of Joseph Fedroffgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Andersongreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Jerry Lee Hendricksgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Galisia
red
2 sentences2024First, the court noted that in order to be entitled to an entrapment instruction, the defendant must “ ‘admit facts which, if proved, would constitute [a] crime.’ ” Id., slip op. at 22 (quoting State v. Galisia, 63 Wn. App. 833, 837 , 822 P.2d 303 (1992), abrogated on other grounds by Trujillo, 75 Wn. App. at 913 ). 2024First, the court noted that in order to be entitled to an entrapment instruction, the defendant must “ ‘admit facts which, if proved, would constitute [a] crime.’ ” Id., slip op. at 22 (quoting State v. Galisia, 63 Wn. App. 833, 837 , 822 P.2d 303 (1992), abrogated on other grounds by Trujillo, 75 Wn. App. at 913 ). | 11 | 1993–2024 |
State v. Draper
green
2 sentences2020App. 802, 806 , 521 P.2d 53 (1974)] thus do not require a defendant to admit either the crime itself or all the elements of a crime before being entitled to an entrapment instruction. 2007App. 802 , 521 P.2d 53 (1974), may require a defendant to admit the charged acts, they do not require admission of “the crime itself or all the elements of a crime before being entitled to an entrapment instruction.” Galisia, 63 Wn. | 5 | 1993–2020 |
State v. Ross
green
2 sentences2021In Trujillo, Division I rejected the typical “some” or “substantial” evidence standard for obtaining instruction on an affirmative defense, instead holding that “to entitle a defendant to an entrapment instruction . . . a defendant must present evidence which would be sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to conclude that the defendant has established the defense of entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence.” Id. at 917 . 2020App. 913, 917 , 883 P.2d 329 (1994). | 4 | 1994–2021 |
State v. McCullum
green
2 sentences2026However, evidence of the elements may come from “‘whatever source’ that tends to show that the defendant is entitled to the instruction.” Fisher, 185 Wn.2d at 849 (quoting McCullum, 98 Wn.2d at 488 ). 2022Id. (citing State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484, 488 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) (plurality opinion); State v. Roberts, 88 Wn.2d 337, 345-46 , 562 P.2d 1259 (1977)). | 3 | 1992–2026 |
Hampton v. United States
green
2 sentences2020SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE SUPPORTED GIVING AN ENTRAPMENT INSTRUCTION A. The trial court erred in considering only whether the undercover officer used more than the “normal amount of persuasion.” “Both by statute and court decision, the entrapment defense focuses on ‘the intent or predisposition of the defendant to commit the crime.’” Smith, 101 Wn.2d at 42 (quoting Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484, 488 , 96 S. Ct. 1646 , 48 L. 2020SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE SUPPORTED GIVING AN ENTRAPMENT INSTRUCTION A. The trial court erred in considering only whether the undercover officer used more than the “normal amount of persuasion.” “Both by statute and court decision, the entrapment defense focuses on ‘the intent or predisposition of the defendant to commit the crime.’” Smith, 101 Wn.2d at 42 (quoting Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484, 488 , 96 S. Ct. 1646 , 48 L. | 3 | 1984–2020 |
State v. Ziegler
green
2 sentences1996State v. Ziegler, 19 Wash.App. 119 , 575 P.2d 723 (1978). 1996State v. Ziegler, 19 Wn. | 3 | 1994–1996 |
State v. Fisher
green
2 sentences2026However, evidence of the elements may come from “‘whatever source’ that tends to show that the defendant is entitled to the instruction.” Fisher, 185 Wn.2d at 849 (quoting McCullum, 98 Wn.2d at 488 ). 2020The court only considered whether there was sufficient evidence to support the instruction, as required by Fisher, 185 Wn.2d at 848-49 . | 2 | 2020–2026 |
State v. Roberts
green
2 sentences2022Id. (citing State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484, 488 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) (plurality opinion); State v. Roberts, 88 Wn.2d 337, 345-46 , 562 P.2d 1259 (1977)). 2022Id. (citing State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484, 488 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) (plurality opinion); State v. Roberts, 88 Wn.2d 337, 345-46 , 562 P.2d 1259 (1977)). | 2 | 1992–2022 |
State of Washington v. Douglas Virgil Arbogast
green
2 sentences2022Arbogast, 15 Wn. App. 2d at 872-73 . 2022Id. at 873 (citing State v. Knapstad, 107 Wn.2d 346, 356-57 , 729 P.2d 48 (1986); Cornwell v. Microsoft Corp., 192 Wn.2d 403 , 410-13, 430 P.3d 229 (2018)). | 2 | 2021–2022 |
State v. Huynh
green
2 sentences2016State v. Huynh, 175 Wn. 2016State v. Huynh, 175 Wn. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Cross
yellow
2 sentences2016Restraint of Cross, 180 Wn.2d 664, 718 , 327 P.3d 660 (2014). 24 No. 45971-0-II Because Lopez-Ortiz was not entitled to an entrapment instruction, as discussed above, his counsel did not perform deficiently when he did not request such an instruction. 2016Restraint of Cross, 180 Wn.2d 664, 718 , 327 P.3d 660 (2014). 24 No. 45971-0-II Because Lopez-Ortiz was not entitled to an entrapment instruction, as discussed above, his counsel did not perform deficiently when he did not request such an instruction. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Scott
green
2 sentences2013State v. Scott, 110 Wn.2d 682, 685-86 , 757 P.2d 492 (1988). 2013State v. Scott, 110 Wn.2d 682, 685-86 , 757 P.2d 492 (1988). | 2 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Matson
green
2 sentences2007In Galisia , the court concluded that while its earlier decisions in State v. Matson, 22 Wash.App. 114 , 587 P.2d 540 (1978), and State v. Draper, 10 Wash.App. 802 , 521 P.2d 53 (1974), may require a defendant to admit the charged acts, they do not require admission of "the crime itself or all the elements of a crime before being entitled to an entrapment instruction." Galisia, 63 Wash. App. at 837 , 822 P.2d 303 ; see also Mathews, 485 U.S. at 62 , 108 S.Ct. 883 (holding that "even if the defendant denies one or more elements of the crime, he is entitled to an entrapment instruction whenever 2007In Galisia , the court concluded that while its earlier decisions in State v. Matson, 22 Wash.App. 114 , 587 P.2d 540 (1978), and State v. Draper, 10 Wash.App. 802 , 521 P.2d 53 (1974), may require a defendant to admit the charged acts, they do not require admission of "the crime itself or all the elements of a crime before being entitled to an entrapment instruction." Galisia, 63 Wash. App. at 837 , 822 P.2d 303 ; see also Mathews, 485 U.S. at 62 , 108 S.Ct. 883 (holding that "even if the defendant denies one or more elements of the crime, he is entitled to an entrapment instruction whenever | 2 | 1995–2007 |
United States v. One Assortment of 89 Firearms
green
2 sentences2003In 89 Firearms, a jury apparently accepted the defendant's entrapment defense and acquitted the defendant of charges that he knowingly dealt in firearms without a license. 465 U.S. at 355-56 , 104 S.Ct. 1099 . 2003In 89 Firearms, a jury apparently accepted the defendant’s entrapment defense and acquitted the defendant of charges that he knowingly dealt in firearms without a license. 465 U.S. at 355-56 . | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Jacobson v. United States
green
2 sentences1996As the Defendant has noted, many jurisdictions that apply the subjective standard for entrapment place the burden of persuasion on the government to disprove entrapment beyond a reasonable doubt. 3 Under federal common law, the State ultimately has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was "disposed to commit the criminal act prior to first being approached by Government agents.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 549 , 112 S. Ct. 1535 , 118 L. 1996As the Defendant has noted, many jurisdictions that apply the subjective standard for entrapment place the burden of persuasion on the government to disprove entrapment beyond a reasonable doubt. 3 Under federal common law, the State ultimately has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was "disposed to commit the criminal act prior to first being approached by Government agents.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 549 , 112 S. Ct. 1535 , 118 L. | 2 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Hansen
green
2 sentences1995State v. Hansen, 69 Wash.App. 750, 764-765 , 850 P.2d 571 (1993), rev'd on other grounds, 124 Wash.2d 719 , 881 P.2d 979 (1994); State v. Galisia, 63 Wash.App. 833, 836 , 822 P.2d 303 , review denied, 119 Wash.2d 1003 , 832 P.2d 487 (1992); State v. Matson, 22 Wash.App. 114, 121 , 587 P.2d 540 (1978); State v. Walker, 11 Wash.App. 84, 87 , 521 P.2d 215 (1974); State v. Draper, 10 Wash.App. 802, 806-807 , 521 P.2d 53 , review denied, 84 Wash.2d 1002 (1974); see also Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58 , 108 S.Ct. 883 , 99 L.Ed.2d 54 (1988) (recognizing that denial of the act and entrapment ar 1995State v. Hansen, 69 Wn. | 2 | 1995–1995 |
State v. Swain
green
2 sentences1982State v. Swain, 10 Wn. 1976See State v. Waggoner, 80 Wn.2d 7 , 490 P.2d 1308 (1971); State v. Swain, 10 Wn. | 2 | 1976–1982 |
People v. Moraga
green
2 sentences1974People v. Moraga, 244 Cal. App. 2d 565 , 53 Cal. Rptr. 563 (1966). 1974People v. Moraga, 244 Cal. App. 2d 565 , 53 Cal. Rptr. 563 (1966). | 2 | 1971–1974 |
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences2026State v. Lopez, 190 Wn.2d 104, 116 , 410 P.3d 1117 (2018). 10 Le contends that his trial counsel was ineffective, arguing “there was no strategic reason to not request the [entrapment] instruction—if the court granted the request, then [he] would have [had] two complementary theories to argue to the jury.” But there was a reason not to request an entrapment instruction—it could have confused the jury and weakened Le’s primary defense theory. 2026State v. Lopez, 190 Wn.2d 104, 116 , 410 P.3d 1117 (2018). 10 Le contends that his trial counsel was ineffective, arguing “there was no strategic reason to not request the [entrapment] instruction—if the court granted the request, then [he] would have [had] two complementary theories to argue to the jury.” But there was a reason not to request an entrapment instruction—it could have confused the jury and weakened Le’s primary defense theory. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Davis
green
1 sentence2022But Trujillo disagreed with Galisia’s holding that defendants needed to produce only “‘some evidence’ to support an entrapment instruction.” Id. (citing Galisia, 63 Wn. App. at 836 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| State v. Enriquez neutral | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Youde
green
1 sentence2022“Where the police merely give a defendant an opportunity to commit a crime by employing a ruse, entrapment is not established.” State v. Youde, 174 Wn. App. 2 State v. Arbogast, No. 99452-8 (Yu, J., dissenting) 873, 886, 301 P.3d 479 (2013); see also RCW 9A.16.070(2). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| State v. Knapstad green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Cornwell v. Microsoft Corp. green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| State v. Harvill green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| State v. McFarland green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| United States v. Raymond E. Kaminski green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| State Of Washington v. Joshua Joseph Solomon green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| United States v. Russell green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| In re the Personal Restraint of Stockwell green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Strickland v. Washington green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Keller green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Manning green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| State v. Walker neutral | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. McFadden green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Stegall green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Riker green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| State v. Chapin green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| State v. Trujillo neutral | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| State v. Lambert neutral | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.