IN HOLDING THAT THE DEATH PENALTY MAY BE IMPOSED FOR MURDER IF PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS ARE PROVIDED, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT RESOLVED THE PRINCIPAL DEATH PENALTY ISSUE. THE COURT IS UNLIKELY TO RECONSIDER THIS HOLDING IN THE NEAR FUTURE, BUT IT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BE ASKED TO REEXAMINE AND DEVELOP THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY MAY BE IMPOSED AND THE SAFEGUARDS REQUIRED. FUTURE LITIGATION WILL FOCUS ON THE FACTS OF CAPITAL CASES RATHER THAN ON BROAD CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES. BECAUSE OF THE 'GREGG' SERIES OF CASES WHICH SET THE STANDARD FOR 'CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT' IN PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING APPROPRIATE SANCTIONS FOR PARTICULAR OFFENSES, MANY OPPONENTS OF THE DEATH PENALTY SHIFTED THEIR ACTIVITIES FROM LEGAL CHALLENGES TO EFFORTS TO MOLD A PUBLIC CONSENSUS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. ALTHOUGH NO CLEAR TREND IN CAPITAL PUNISHMENT LEGISLATION HAS EMERGED, STATES HAVE NOT RUSHED TO ENACT NEW CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATUTES UNDER THE IMPETUS OF COURT DECISIONS. THE SUPREME COURT FIRST RECOGNIZED ENTRAPMENT AS A DEFENSE TO A FEDERAL PROSECUTION IN 1932 IN SORRELLS V. UNITED STATES, WHERE THE COURT CHARACTERIZED ENTRAPMENT AS CONDUCT BY GOVERNMENT AGENTS THAT 'IMPLANTS IN THE MIND OF AN INNOCENT PERSON THE DISPOSITION TO COMMIT THE ALLEGED OFFENSE AND INDUCE ITS COMMISSION IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY PROSECUTE.' IN SUBSEQUENT CASES, ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE COURT HAVE SOUGHT TO EXPAND ENTRAPMENT TO INCLUDE LAW ENFORCEMENT INVOLVEMENT IN CONTRIBUTING TO A DEFENDANT'S COMMISSION OF A CRIME, EVEN THOUGH THE DEFENDANT CAN BE SHOWN TO HAVE HAD A PREDISPOSITION TO COMMIT THE OFFENSE. THE STANDARD FOR ENTRAPMENT RENDERED IN SORRELLS HAS BEEN REAFFIRMED, HOWEVER, IN SHERMAN, RUSSELL, AND HAMPTON, SUCH THAT LOWER COURTS CANNOT ALLOW THE DEFENSE OF ENTRAPMENT WHERE THE PROSECUTION SHOWS THE DEFENDANT'S PREDISPOSITION TO COMMIT THE OFFENSE AT ISSUE. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)