Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

No Entrapment Defense for Child-Sex Related Online Crime & Civil Rights Matter

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on September 27, 2010 4:26 PM

US v. Orr, 08-2267, concerned a challenge to a conviction of defendant for attempting to persuade or induce a minor to travel in interstate commerce to engage in sexual activity and using a facility of interstate commerce to do so, arising from online communications with an undercover police officer.  In affirming the conviction, the court held that any attempt by defendant to assert entrapment during trial would have been futile because it is well settled that, absent extraordinary promises, making a defendant a criminal offer does not constitute government inducement, and all factors indicate that defendant was predisposed to commit the charged offense.


Gates v. City of Chicago, 08-1455, concerned a challenge to district court's grant of summary judgment for a city on plaintiffs' federal due process claims and dismissal of their state law restitution claims as moot, in plaintiffs' suit challenging the city's policies governing the return of seized funds to those arrested by police officers.

In vacating in part, the court held that the summary judgment in favor of the city on the issue of notice sufficient to satisfy due process was premature given that the notice provided misleading and incomplete information and the district court erred in finding that no more than the initial Pollard mailing to the address listed on the inventory receipt was required for narcotics arrestees.  Further, the district court's summary judgment on the due process claims is vacated as, given the conflicts in the evidence and deficiencies in the city's legal justifications for shifting the burden to arrestees to demonstrate entitlement to their money at the conclusion of their criminal cases, the district court erred in entering judgment in favor of the city.  However, in affirming in part, the court held that the district court correctly dismissed the restitution claims as moot as the city tendered the full amounts the plaintiffs requested in the restitution counts long before the plaintiffs even added these claims to their complaints.

Related Resources:

Find a Lawyer

More Options