NCJ Number
137840
Journal
Notre Dame Law Review Volume: 67 Issue: 3 Dated: (1992) Pages: 745-797
Date Published
1992
Length
53 pages
Annotation
Reverse sting operations are becoming an increasingly popular mode of combating drug offenses in the United States, but due process and government conduct are important considerations in such law enforcement procedures.
Abstract
A reverse sting is an undercover operation in which law enforcement officers sell previously confiscated drugs. Agents arrange drug deals with potential buyers, monitor these deals, and arrest purchasers after the sale has been completed. Arrested purchasers often attempt to assert entrapment or due process defenses. Due to policy considerations in drug cases, few courts have reversed convictions based on these defenses. Evaluating due process cases in light of the law enforcement justification can provide a structured yet flexible standard for use by courts to evaluate government conduct. This approach is preferable to the open-ended outrageousness standard currently employed by the U.S. Supreme Court in evaluating the due process defense because the law enforcement justification is evaluated in the context of applicable administrative guidelines and statutes, constitutional rights, and existing case law. The evolution of the due process defense is analyzed, and four Supreme Court cases that dealt with the entrapment defense and ultimately led to the due process defense are examined. The approach of circuit courts to due process claims in reverse sting cases is discussed, as well as various attempts to define precise parameters of the due process defense and the meaning of outrageous government conduct. 300 footnotes