skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 67716 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: ENTRAPMENT AND THE NEW JERSEY CODE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Journal: CRIMINAL JUSTICE QUARTERLY  Volume:7  Issue:1  Dated:(SPRING/SUMMER 1979)  Pages:3-16
Author(s): M KONRAY
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 14
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: NEW JERSEY'S NEW PENAL CODE OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1979, IS EXAMINED WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO ITS LEGISLATIVE PRONOUNCEMENT ON THE CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE OF ENTRAPMENT.
Abstract: EXISTING LAW ON ENTRAPMENT IS NOT UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. WHERE ENTRAPMENT IS ACCEPTED AS A VALID DEFENSE, DIVERGENCES OF OPINION EXIST ON WHETHER IT SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE OBJECTIVE OR THE SUBJECTIVE TEST, WHETHER THE CLAIM OF ENTRAPMENT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE ONLY TO THOSE WHO ADMIT GUILT, HOW THE DEFENSE SHOULD BE RAISED PROCEDURALLY, AND WHO BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROOF. NEW JERSEY'S NEW CODIFICATION UNDERTAKES TO RESOLVE SOME OF THIS UNCERTAINTY, YET MANY ISSUES REMAIN TO BE DECIDED BY CASE LAW AS THE COURTS INTERPRET THE NEW STATUTE. NEW JERSEY HAS ADOPTED AN INTERMEDIATE POSITION BETWEEN THE SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE VIEWS OF THE DEFENSE. THE LEGISLATIVE FOCUS OF THE CODE IS ON THE GOVERNMENT'S CONDUCT AND ON WHETHER SUCH CONDUCT CAUSED THE DEFENDANT TO COMMIT THE CRIME. THE CODE DOES NOT SPEAK TO THE QUESTION OF THE INCONSISTENCY RULE, AND IT IS LIKELY THAT THE COURTS WILL FOLLOW THE LAW ENUNCIATED IN STATE V. BRANAM WHICH ALLOWS INCONSISTENT DEFENSES. ENTRAPMENT IS DESIGNATED AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE IN THE NEW CODE, AND THE BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING IT BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE RESTS ON THE DEFENDANT. THE QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE ISSUE TO THE JURY IS STILL OPEN, AS IS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE PROSECUTION MAY OFFER PRIOR CONVICTIONS, BAD REPUTATION, AND HEARSAY IN REBUTTAL OF THE DEFENSE, TO ESTABLISH PREDISPOSITION (THAT THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE WAS NOT CAUSED BY GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITY). BECAUSE OF THESE OPEN QUESTIONS, THE PRECODE CASE LAW IN NEW JERSEY IS LIKELY TO REMAIN VIABLE AS NEW CASES REACH THE COURTS FOR DECISION. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.
Index Term(s): Criminal codes; Entrapment; Judicial decisions; New Jersey; Rights of the accused; Rules of evidence; State courts; State laws; State supreme courts
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=67716

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.