MT · jury_instructions
Mont. Crim. Jury Instr. 9-113 (2022)
Entrapment
You are instructed that one of the issues in this case is whether the Defendant was entrapped. If the Defendant was entrapped, he/she must be found not guilty. The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was not entrapped.
If the Defendant before contact with [law enforcement officer/agent] did not have any intent or disposition to commit the crime charged and was induced or persuaded by [officer/agent] to commit that crime, then she/he was entrapped.
On the other hand, if the Defendant before contact with [officer/agent] did have an intent or disposition to commit the crime charged, then he/she was not entrapped, even though [officer/agent] provided a favorable opportunity to commit the crime or made committing the crime easier or even participated in acts essential to the crime.
Provenance
- Source
- courts.mt.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2022
- Content hash
720d4b273873f39d783e66267b65726e07dbf2c2c5266baae05cfd95461ddb5e
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.