N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. » N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. / Title lxii / Chapter 626
New Hampshire Revised Statutes

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 626:5 (2026)

Entrapment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NH-GCgc.nh.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    626:5 Entrapment. – It is an affirmative defense that the actor committed the offense because he was induced or encouraged to do so by a law enforcement official or by a person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence against him and when the methods used to obtain such evidence were such as to create a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by a person not otherwise disposed to commit it. However, conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.

Source. 1971, 518:1, eff. Nov. 1, 1973.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case: State v. Little, 435 A.2d 517 (N.H. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Little, 435 A.2d 517 (N.H. 1981). · cites it 12× “At trial, the defendant did not contest the fact that he had sold marijuana to an undercover agent of the State police, but he did raise the affirmative defense of entrapment, RSA 626:5. On appeal, the defendant, through new counsel, raises numerous issues.”
England v. State, 887 S.W.2d 902 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “2d 159, at 162 (1977), the Hawaii Supreme Court declared that "[t]he language of [Haw.”
State v. Larose, 944 A.2d 566 (N.H. 2008). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to RSA 626:5 (2007): It is an affirmative defense that the actor committed the offense because he was induced or encouraged to do so by a law enforcement official or by a person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence…”
State of New Hampshire v. Colleen Carr, 167 N.H. 264 (N.H. 2015). · cites it 2× “RSA 626:5 (2007). To be entitled to an instruction on this defense, a defendant must point to “some evidence” that: (1) law enforcement officials induced or encouraged the defendant to commit the offense; and (2) the defendant was not predisposed to engage in it.”
United States v. Olga Valencia & William Suarez Valencia, 645 F.2d 1158 (2d Cir. 1980). “§ 702-237 (1976); N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 626:5 (1974); N.Y.Penal Law § 40.”
State v. Linsky, 379 A.2d 813 (N.H. 1977). “RSA 626:5; State v. Bacon, 114 N.H. 306 , 319 A.”
State v. Bacon, 319 A.2d 636 (N.H. 1974). · cites it 3× “1, 1973), viz: when the methods used to obtain such evidence were such as to create a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by a person not otherwise disposed to commit it, made the following com *309 ment in its report: “This section proposes that the test be the…”
State v. Guaraldi, 467 A.2d 233 (N.H. 1983). “1981) (justifiable conduct as defense); RSA 628:1 (immaturity as defense); and RSA 628:2 (insanity as defense). A criminal defense, rightly understood in this context, resembles what is accomplished in civil law by a plea of confession and avoidance: The defendant raising such a…”
State v. Saulnier, 566 A.2d 1135 (N.H. 1989). “Although the defendant admitted his guilt with respect to the three charges, he raised the affirmative defense of entrapment pursuant to RSA 626:5. The jury found him guilty as charged.”
State v. Mendola, 8 A.3d 127 (N.H. 2010). · cites it 3× “RSA 626:5 (2007). To be entitled to an instruction on this defense, a defendant must point to “some evidence” that: (1) law enforcement officials induced or encouraged the defendant to commit the offense; and (2) the defendant was not predisposed to engage in it.”
State v. Gelinas, 790 A.2d 138 (N.H. 2002). · cites it 6× “The defendant asserted the affirmative defense of entrapment, see RSA 626:5 (1996), arguing that the task force and its informant coerced her into committing criminal acts to which she was not predisposed.”
State of New Hampshire v. Casely Schandorf (N.H. 2025). · cites it 2× “RSA 626:5 defines entrapment as: [A]n affirmative defense that the actor committed the offense because he was induced or encouraged to do so by a law enforcement official or by a person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence…”
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.