## Facts

- In 1984, Keith Jacobson, a Nebraska farmer and veteran, legally ordered two magazines depicting nude preteen and teenage boys; the images were not sexually explicit and were lawful under federal and state law at the time.
- Congress later criminalized receipt by mail of sexually explicit depictions of children, and postal inspectors identified Jacobson from a bookstore mailing list.
- For about 2.5 years, government agents used multiple fictitious organizations and a bogus pen pal to solicit Jacobson by mail and test his willingness to order illegal material.
- The mailings included ideological and political appeals about “sexual freedom,” censorship, and “freedom of choice,” and encouraged Jacobson to complete a “sexual attitude” questionnaire.
- After approximately 26 months of repeated contacts, Jacobson ordered a magazine depicting minors engaged in sexual activity from a government-created catalog.
- Agents conducted a controlled delivery and arrested Jacobson; a search found no illegal materials other than items the government had sent and the earlier lawful magazines.

## Issues

1. Whether the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Jacobson was predisposed to receive child pornography before and independent of government inducement, defeating his entrapment defense.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the conviction in a 5–4 decision.
- The Court held the prosecution failed, as a matter of law, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jacobson was predisposed, independent of government actions, to commit the charged offense.
- The Court concluded the government crossed the line from offering an opportunity to manufacturing a crime by an otherwise law-abiding citizen.
- The Court found the evidence cited as predisposition (including the earlier lawful purchases and Jacobson’s responses to the mailings) did not establish pre-contact readiness to commit the crime.

## Legal Principles

- Entrapment bars conviction when the government originates the criminal design, implants the disposition in an innocent person, and induces the offense.
- Once entrapment is at issue, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime before first contact with government agents.
- Predisposition must be independent of government persuasion; prolonged solicitation and ideological pressure cannot supply the proof required to show preexisting intent.
- Prior lawful conduct or generalized interest that falls within a broad range of noncriminal behavior is insufficient, without more, to prove predisposition to commit a later-criminalized act.
- A conviction may be set aside when the record cannot support a rational finding of predisposition beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

Because the government’s extended campaign preceded and shaped Jacobson’s decision to order illegal material, and independent evidence of pre-contact predisposition was lacking, the Court held the entrapment defense was established as a matter of law and reversed the conviction.


Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992)