Utah Code » Title 76, Chapter 2 — Principles of Criminal Responsibility; part 76-2-3 — Defenses to Criminal Responsibility
Utah Code

Utah Code § 76-2-303 (2026)

Entrapment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is a defense that the actor was entrapped into committing the offense. Entrapment occurs when a peace officer or a person directed by or acting in cooperation with the officer induces the commission of an offense in order to obtain evidence of the commission for prosecution by methods creating a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by one not otherwise ready to commit it. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.
The defense of entrapment shall be unavailable when causing or threatening bodily injury is an element of the offense charged and the prosecution is based on conduct causing or threatening the injury to a person other than the person perpetrating the entrapment.
The defense provided by this section is available even though the actor denies commission of the conduct charged to constitute the offense.
Upon written motion of the defendant, the court shall hear evidence on the issue and shall determine as a matter of fact and law whether the defendant was entrapped to commit the offense. Defendant's motion shall be made at least 10 days before trial except the court for good cause shown may permit a later filing.
Should the court determine that the defendant was entrapped, it shall dismiss the case with prejudice, but if the court determines the defendant was not entrapped, such issue may be presented by the defendant to the jury at trial. Any order by the court dismissing a case based on entrapment shall be appealable by the state.
In any hearing before a judge or jury where the defense of entrapment is an issue, past offenses of the defendant shall not be admitted, except that in a trial where the defendant testifies, the defendant may be asked about past convictions for felonies and any testimony given by the defendant at a hearing on entrapment may be used to impeach the defendant's testimony at trial.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: State v. Taylor, 599 P.2d 496 (Utah 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Taylor, 599 P.2d 496 (Utah 1979). · cites it 18× “There has been a degree of confusion generated over the proper interpretation of the entrapment statute, § 76-2-303, since its enactment in the new Criminal Code in 1973.”
State v. Dickerson, 2022 UT App 56 (Utah Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 19× “In response, the State initially argued that we had jurisdiction over a direct appeal under subsection (5) of the entrapment statute, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (5) (LexisNexis 2017), even though not all charges against Dickerson were dismissed.”
State v. Richardson, 843 P.2d 517 (Utah Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 12× “Utah's entrapment defense is codified in Utah Code Annotated section 76-2-303(1) (1990) and provides as follows: Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement officer or a person directed by or acting in cooperation with the officer induces the commission of an offense in order to…”
State v. Smith, 2024 UT 13 (Utah 2024). · cites it 7× “48 We are thus not persuaded that this factual commonality between our prior cases can or should be construed as an implicit recognition of a necessary condition.”
State v. Hansen, 588 P.2d 164 (Utah 1978). · cites it 14× “[2] Section 76-2-303, U.C.A. 1953, subsection (1) defines entrapment: Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement officer .”
State v. Colonna, 766 P.2d 1062 (Utah 1988). · cites it 10× “Defendant argues that he was entrapped as a matter of law pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1) (1978). He claims that the crime of aggravated robbery would not have occurred but for the officer’s conduct in supplying drugs, alcohol, and transportation, thereby causing…”
State v. Wright, 744 P.2d 315 (Utah Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1) (1977). By enacting section 76-2-303, the Legislature rejected the subjective standard of entrapment, which focuses on a defendant’s predisposition to commit the offense.”
State v. Hernandez, 2020 UT App 58 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 8× “¶6 A defendant may assert entrapment as a defense to a charge of criminal conduct by making a written motion, Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (4) (LexisNexis 2017), and pointing to some evidence of entrapment, cf.”
State v. Wynia, 754 P.2d 667 (Utah Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 8× “Before trial, defendant claimed entrapment as a defense pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1978). After a hearing, the court denied the motion, but allowed the issue of entrapment to be presented to the jury.”
State v. Hatchett, 2020 UT App 61 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 6× “Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1) (LexisNexis 2017).”
State v. Olkon, 299 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 2× “06 (Vernon 1974); Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1978). [6] See, e.”
State v. Keitz, 856 P.2d 685 (Utah Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 6× “Keitz only disputes his legal guilt, claiming that he was entrapped and his *689 case should be dismissed pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (5) (1990), which provides, in pertinent part: “Should the court determine that the defendant was entrapped, it shall dismiss the case…”
Show all 43 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(1) — 14 cases
State v. Richardson, 843 P.2d 517 (Utah Ct. App. 1992). “Utah's entrapment defense is codified in Utah Code Annotated section 76-2-303(1) (1990) and provides as follows: Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement officer or a person directed by or acting in cooperation with the officer induces the commission of an offense in order to…”
State v. Taylor, 599 P.2d 496 (Utah 1979). “There has been a degree of confusion generated over the proper interpretation of the entrapment statute, § 76-2-303, since its enactment in the new Criminal Code in 1973.”
State v. Wynia, 754 P.2d 667 (Utah Ct. App. 1988). “Before trial, defendant claimed entrapment as a defense pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1978). After a hearing, the court denied the motion, but allowed the issue of entrapment to be presented to the jury.”
State v. Sprague, 680 P.2d 404 (Utah 1984).
State v. Smith, 2024 UT 13 (Utah 2024). “48 We are thus not persuaded that this factual commonality between our prior cases can or should be construed as an implicit recognition of a necessary condition.”
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(2) — 1 case
State v. Colonna, 766 P.2d 1062 (Utah 1988). “Defendant argues that he was entrapped as a matter of law pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (1) (1978). He claims that the crime of aggravated robbery would not have occurred but for the officer’s conduct in supplying drugs, alcohol, and transportation, thereby causing…”
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(3) — 1 case
State v. Taylor, 599 P.2d 496 (Utah 1979). “There has been a degree of confusion generated over the proper interpretation of the entrapment statute, § 76-2-303, since its enactment in the new Criminal Code in 1973.”
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(4) — 5 cases
State v. Smith, 2024 UT 13 (Utah 2024). “48 We are thus not persuaded that this factual commonality between our prior cases can or should be construed as an implicit recognition of a necessary condition.”
State v. Bridwell, 566 P.2d 1232 (Utah 1977).
State v. Kaufman, 734 P.2d 465 (Utah 1987).
State v. Jennings, 2025 UT 59 (Utah 2025).
State v. Jennings, 2026 UT 4 (Utah 2026).
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(5) — 6 cases
State v. Dickerson, 2022 UT App 56 (Utah Ct. App. 2022). “In response, the State initially argued that we had jurisdiction over a direct appeal under subsection (5) of the entrapment statute, see Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (5) (LexisNexis 2017), even though not all charges against Dickerson were dismissed.”
State v. Smith, 2024 UT 13 (Utah 2024). “48 We are thus not persuaded that this factual commonality between our prior cases can or should be construed as an implicit recognition of a necessary condition.”
State v. Keitz, 856 P.2d 685 (Utah Ct. App. 1993). “Keitz only disputes his legal guilt, claiming that he was entrapped and his *689 case should be dismissed pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-303 (5) (1990), which provides, in pertinent part: “Should the court determine that the defendant was entrapped, it shall dismiss the case…”
State v. Kaufman, 734 P.2d 465 (Utah 1987).
State v. Kent (Utah Ct. App. 2026).
— Utah Code § 76-2-303(6) — 2 cases
State v. Hansen, 588 P.2d 164 (Utah 1978). “[2] Section 76-2-303, U.C.A. 1953, subsection (1) defines entrapment: Entrapment occurs when a law enforcement officer .”
State v. Smith, 2024 UT 13 (Utah 2024). “48 We are thus not persuaded that this factual commonality between our prior cases can or should be construed as an implicit recognition of a necessary condition.”
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.