Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-505 (2026)

Entrapment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It is a defense to prosecution that law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when the person was not predisposed to do so. If a defendant intends to rely on the defense of entrapment, the defendant shall give to the district attorney general a notice comparable to that required for an insanity defense under Rule 12.2 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: State v. Shuck, 953 S.W.2d 662 (Tenn. 1997).
State v. Shuck, 953 S.W.2d 662 (Tenn. 1997). · cites it 6× “According to Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-505 (1991), entrapment occurs “when law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when the person was not predisposed to do so.”
State v. Blackmon, 78 S.W.3d 322 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-505; see also Latham, 910 S.”
State v. Shropshire, 874 S.W.2d 634 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to T.C.A. § 39-11-505, it is a defense if “law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when the person was not predisposed to do so.”
State v. Latham, 910 S.W.2d 892 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). · cites it 6× “According to Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-11-505 (1991), entrapment occurs when “law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when the person was not predisposed to do so.”
Robert C. Clanton v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “We agree with the post-conviction court’s denial of relief but on different grounds. “[I]t is a defense to prosecution that law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when…”
Arthur Lee Jamison, Jr. v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “The record shows that trial counsel did not file notice pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-11-505 and that at trial, the trial court informed trial counsel that he could not present an entrapment defense because he had not provided proper notice.”
State of Tennessee v. Lavondas C. Nelson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2024). · cites it 4× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-505 . The first reference in the record to a potential entrapment defense occurs in the transcript from the morning of the second day of trial, at which point the trial court acknowledged receiving defense counsel’s request for jury instructions but…”
State of Tennessee v. Bobby Vincent Blackmon (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-505 ; see also Latham, 910 S.”
State of Tennessee v. Jordan Peters (Tenn. Crim. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-11-505 provides, It is a defense to prosecution that law enforcement officials, acting either directly or through an agent, induced or persuaded an otherwise unwilling person to commit an unlawful act when the person was not predisposed to do…”
Timothy Allen Johnson v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2022). · cites it 3× “T.C.A. § 39-11-505. Entrapment as described by Tenn.”
John Britt v. State of Tennessee (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “T.C.A. § 39-11-505 (2006). He contends that, had trial counsel utilized all the available evidence and done a more thorough job of cross-examining the witnesses, the proof would have, in fact, raised the defense.”
State of Tennessee v. Charles Lincoln Falkner (Tenn. Crim. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “See T.C.A. § 39-11-505 (1997) (“It is a defense to prosecution that law enforcement officials, acting 6 Although not specifically argued, the evidence would still need to pass basic relevancy requirements.”
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.