## Facts

- Moore sold Vicodin and Xanax pills to an acquaintance, Jason Vandine.
- Vandine was acting as a confidential informant for the police during the drug purchase.
- The State of Michigan charged Moore with two counts of delivery of a controlled substance based on the sales.
- The case was tried to the court in a bench trial.
- Moore did not deny making the sales; he argued that he was entrapped.
- Moore testified that Vandine pressured him to sell the pills.
- According to Moore, Vandine called him about twice per week for roughly one month asking to buy pills.
- The trial court rejected the entrapment defense and convicted Moore on both delivery counts.
- Moore appealed, arguing the trial court erred by finding no entrapment.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Michigan’s objective entrapment standard, the government’s use of a confidential informant who repeatedly requested pills amounted to entrapment that barred Moore’s prosecution for delivering Vicodin and Xanax.

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed Moore’s convictions.
- The court agreed with the trial court that Moore did not establish entrapment.
- The court concluded that repeated requests by the informant, without additional improper pressure or inducement, did not amount to impermissible police conduct under Michigan’s objective test.
- The court left the trial court’s rejection of the entrapment defense in place.

## Legal Principles

- Michigan applies an objective entrapment test that centers on whether police conduct would cause an otherwise law-abiding person, in the defendant’s situation, to commit the crime.
- Entrapment is not shown merely because law enforcement (directly or through an informant) provides an opportunity to commit an offense.
- Repeated solicitation, standing alone, generally does not amount to entrapment absent coercion, threats, or other improper inducement.
- The defendant has the burden to prove entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence.
- On appeal, the reviewing court gives deference to the trial court’s entrapment-related fact findings and will not overturn them without clear error.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals affirmed Moore’s bench-trial convictions for delivering Vicodin and Xanax because the informant’s repeated phone requests to purchase pills—without coercion or comparable improper inducement—did not constitute entrapment under Michigan’s objective standard, and the trial court did not clearly err in rejecting the defense.


People v. Moore, 2007 WL 2609506 (2007)