Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
Contrary to defendant's argument on appeal, the court's charge did not state or imply that the defense of entrapment was available only to innocent persons or that it was foreclosed to those, such as defendant, who previously had committed crimes. Pursuant to defendant's request, the court excised that portion of the model charge that has been held to convey that impression (see, People v Ellis,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.