United States v. Justin Spentz

This appeal presents the issue as to when, in a criminal trial, a district court must give the jury instructions requested by a defendant regarding an entrapment defense. Defendants Justin Spentz and Steven Golden appeal from their convictions for conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (a), conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 , possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c)(1)(A), and aiding and abetting in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 . Defendants argue that the district court erred in refusing to provide an entrapment instruction to the jury. There was, however, insufficient evidence presented at trial to support a finding by the jury that defendants were induced by the government to commit the crimes, one of the two necessary elements of an entrapment defense. As a result, we conclude that the district court did not err by refusing to give the entrapment instruction, and we affirm.

I. Background

In September 2007, agents of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) opened an undercover…