Under the objective approach to entrapment, if the state provides an essential element that makes the crime possible, or there is extensive and coercive pressure on the defendant, what might a court rule?

Under the objective approach to entrapment, if the state provides an essential element that makes the crime possible, or there is extensive and coercive pressure on the defendant, what might a court rule?

• A. the defendant was guilty
• B. the case can move to the trial stage
• C. entrapment has occurred
• D. entrapment has not occurred

Answer: (C)

The main idea here is how the objective approach treats government conduct. Under this view, what matters is whether the state’s actions themselves created or enabled the crime, not the defendant’s mindset. If the government provides an essential element that makes the crime possible, or uses extensive and coercive pressure to push the defendant into committing the offense, the court is likely to rule that entrapment has occurred. This approach focuses on overreach by authorities—manufacturing the opportunity or coercing participation—rather than on whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime. So the correct conclusion is that entrapment has occurred.

The main idea here is how the objective approach treats government conduct. Under this view, what matters is whether the state’s actions themselves created or enabled the crime, not the defendant’s mindset. If the government provides an essential element that makes the crime possible, or uses extensive and coercive pressure to push the defendant into committing the offense, the court is likely to rule that entrapment has occurred. This approach focuses on overreach by authorities—manufacturing the opportunity or coercing participation—rather than on whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime. So the correct conclusion is that entrapment has occurred.