ROMO LO BUONO, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the issue of entrapment is a question for the jury, and the evidence presented allowed the jury to find predisposition beyond a reasonable doubt.
Lo Buono was convicted of selling LSD. He claimed unlawful entrapment as a matter of law, arguing the judge should decide entrapment and that the evid…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Question cases and more on FLexlaw
BELLONI, District Judge.
Lo Buono was convicted of the sale and possession for sale of 7,854 LSD tablets in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 331 (q). He claims his conviction should be reversed on the ground that he was unlawfully entrapped as a matter of law.
Lo Buono’s appeal briefs presented two theories. First, he argues that the issue of entrapment should have been decided by the judge, not the jury. On oral argument he admitted the federal cases all go against him on this theory. Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 53 S.Ct. 210, 77 L.Ed. 413 (1932). We agree and see no reason to change the law of this circuit. Pulido v. United States, 425 F. 2d 1391 (9th Cir. 1970).
Lo Buono’s second theory is that the evidence required a finding of entrapment as a matter of law. After a defendant introduces evidence of entrapment the burden shifts to the government to prove predisposition. Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369, 78 S.Ct. 819, 2 L.Ed.2d 848 (1958). We hold the facts were such that the jury could have found the appellant to be a voluntary seller rather than an entrapped one. Their verdict shows the jury found the government proved predisposition beyond a reasonable doubt.
We affirm.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (U.S. 1932)
- Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369 (U.S. 1958)
- Pulido v. United States, 425 F.2d 1391 (9th Cir. 1970)