In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit. It is not legal ANYWHERE.
Michael I. Stober has written: 'Entrapment in Canadian criminal law' -- subject(s): Criminal investigation, Entrapment (Criminal law)
If it is a matter of spying as it applies to the national security of the US - ordinary criminal law regarding entrapment would not apply.
no its not the only state that some catalytic converters r against the law is in CA
Entrapment straddles the lines between criminal law and criminal procedure because it involves the actions of law enforcement in inducing someone to commit a crime. It is a defense in criminal law, asserting that the individual would not have committed the crime if not for the actions of law enforcement. The defense of entrapment can impact the fairness of criminal proceedings, raising questions about due process and police conduct.
Entrapment in legal terms refers to a defense used by a defendant who claims they were induced or persuaded by law enforcement to commit a crime they would not have otherwise committed. This defense argues that the government's conduct was so overbearing that it effectively coerced the defendant into committing the offense. If successfully proven, entrapment can lead to the dismissal of charges or an acquittal. The specifics of the entrapment defense can vary by jurisdiction.
In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers (or their agents) to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit. There is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and all the government agents do is merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. See: http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/entrapment/
The answer is no. According to the 'Lectric Law Dictionary, Entrapment means:You were pursuaded by law enforcement or government agents to commit a crime that you had no original intention to commit.If you wanted to break the law and police made it easy for you to do so, there is no entrapment. Basically, there are three things which must occur for a law violation to be ruled entrapment.1. The idea to commit the crime came from the police (or gov't agents) and not from the defendant.2. The gov't agents talked the defendant into committing the crime.3. The defendant was not willing to commit the crime before the gov't agents talked to him/her.
Yes, entrapment is considered a procedural defense in criminal law. It occurs when law enforcement agents induce a person to commit a crime that they would not have otherwise committed. To successfully use entrapment as a defense, the defendant must typically show that they were not predisposed to engage in criminal behavior prior to the government's intervention. If proven, it can lead to the dismissal of charges or an acquittal.
You ca get put in jail, if you engage in, or suspected to have engaged in activities termed to be against the set law.
The word you are looking for is ENTRAPMENT, and is raised quite often as a defense.Definition follows:"In criminal law, a person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit. However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. The mere providing of an opportunity to commit a crime is not entrapment. In order to find entrapment, the entrapped person must be persuaded by law enforcement to commit the illegal act."
entrapment
In CA yes, Having a "Oil burner". In other places it is not