Hudson

United States v. Hudson

Bad Law
3 F. Supp. 3d 772·2014 WL 960860·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33952
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 10, 2014Case No. 2:13-cr-00126-ODW-3California8,721 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wright, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS INDICTMENT FOR OUTRAGEOUS GOVERNMENT CONDUCT [92]

I. INTRODUCTION

“ ‘Lead us not into temptation,’ ” Judge Noonan warned. United States v. Black, 733 F.3d 294, 313 (9th Cir.2013) (Noonan, J., dissenting). But into temptation the Government has gone, ensnaring chronically unemployed individuals from poverty-ridden areas in its fake drug stash-house robberies. While undoubtedly a valid law-enforcement tool when employed to target or prevent demonstrated criminal enterprises, reverse stings offend the United States Constitution when used solely to obtain convictions.

The Court is mindful that fighting crime is undoubtedly an arduous task that the Executive Branch must endure. But as James Madison wrote in The Federalist No. 51,

The only way to effectively control the Government in this case and effectuate the due process that the Constitution demands is to dismiss this indictment which the ATF obtained against Defendant Antuan Duane Dunlap through outrageous government conduct. For the reasons discussed below, the Court accordingly GRANTS Dunlap’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment. (ECF No. 92.) Dunlap shall be RELEASED from custody FORTHWITH…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.