Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 777.201 (2025)

Entrapment.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

777.201 Entrapment.—

(1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement officer perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, he or she induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.

(2) A person prosecuted for a crime shall be acquitted if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that his or her criminal conduct occurred as a result of an entrapment. The issue of entrapment shall be tried by the trier of fact.

History.—s. 42, ch. 87-243; s. 1196, ch. 97-102.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 112 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Munoz v. State, 629 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Munoz v. State, 629 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1993). · cites it 41× “1st DCA 1991), in which the district court held that section 777.201, Florida Statutes (1987), abolished the objective entrapment test we set forth in Cruz v.”

Gennette v. State, 124 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). · cites it 26× “Gennette argued that his conduct was the product of entrapment by the government, as defined by section 777.201, Florida Statutes, and that he was thus entitled to dismissal as a matter of law.”

Herrera v. State, 594 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 1992). · cites it 13× “The new paragraph in the entrapment instruction is based on section 777.201, Florida Statutes (1989), which reads as follows: (1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement…”

Vazquez v. State, 700 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). · cites it 14× “" § 777.201, Fla. Stat. (1995). [4] See Herrera v.”

State v. Blanco, 896 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). · cites it 9× “Although the Legislature has reshaped the subjective test on entrapment into a specific statute under which the jury has a leading role, the supreme court made clear in Munoz that the entrapment statute does not bar the trial Judge from evaluating police conduct under the Due…”

State of Florida v. Jamal Rashad Laing, 182 So. 3d 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). · cites it 5× “§ 777.201, Fla. Stat. (2013) (emphasis added).”

Holiday v. State, 753 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 2000). · cites it 8× “§ 777.201, Fla. Stat. (1999). After tracing the development of the entrapment defense under both federal and Florida law, see 629 So.”

Gonzalez v. State, 571 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). · cites it 7× “§ 777.201, Fla. Stat. (1987). Before section 777.”

State v. Murphy, 124 So. 3d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). · cites it 4× “2d 90, 99 (Fla.1993). Subjective entrapment focuses on whether conduct by law enforcement induced, encouraged, or caused the defendant to commit a crime when he or she was not predisposed to do so.”

Lewis v. State, 597 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). · cites it 11× “In the first place, it is clear that Hunter can be rationalized only on one of the alternative grounds that section 777.201, Florida Statutes (1987) did not overrule the objective entrapment aspect of Cruz v.”

Davis v. State, 937 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). · cites it 7× “The subjective test set forth in section 777.201, Florida Statutes, is the test to be applied on the issue of entrapment in the absence of egregious law enforcement conduct.”

State v. Henderson, 955 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). · cites it 4× “The subjective entrapment theory has been codified at section 777.201, Florida Statutes (2006), and, under such *1195 theory, the first question that must be addressed is "whether an agent of the government induced the accused to commit the offense charged.”

Show all 112 citing cases →

— 777.201(1) — 21 cases

Davis v. State, 937 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). “The subjective test set forth in section 777.201, Florida Statutes, is the test to be applied on the issue of entrapment in the absence of egregious law enforcement conduct.”

Jimenez v. State, 993 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).

Gennette v. State, 124 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). “Gennette argued that his conduct was the product of entrapment by the government, as defined by section 777.201, Florida Statutes, and that he was thus entitled to dismissal as a matter of law.”

State v. Henderson, 955 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). “The subjective entrapment theory has been codified at section 777.201, Florida Statutes (2006), and, under such *1195 theory, the first question that must be addressed is "whether an agent of the government induced the accused to commit the offense charged.”

State v. Simmons, 80 So. 3d 1089 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

— 777.201(2) — 26 cases

Herrera v. State, 594 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 1992). “The new paragraph in the entrapment instruction is based on section 777.201, Florida Statutes (1989), which reads as follows: (1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement…”

State v. Blanco, 896 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “Although the Legislature has reshaped the subjective test on entrapment into a specific statute under which the jury has a leading role, the supreme court made clear in Munoz that the entrapment statute does not bar the trial Judge from evaluating police conduct under the Due…”

Murray v. State, 937 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).

Vazquez v. State, 700 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). “" § 777.201, Fla. Stat. (1995). [4] See Herrera v.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.