Entrapment defense has been widely used within the criminal justice system. The case in question has been used to address the issue of entrapment defense. The differences between intermediate and high appellate courts, options about the case, and the consequences that might follow me if the court finds the defense valid and reverses the judgment are the issues that will be addressed in this essay.

The main function of the intermediate appellate courts is reviewing the trial record for errors that might have been committed during the trial of a case. The losing party in a case has all rights to appeal to the intermediate appellate court, and the case can be reviewed. On the other hand, the jurisdictions in the higher appellate courts are final, and there is no right of appeal (Acker & Irving, 1998). The highest appellate court selects the cases to decide, after its assessment of the significance of the cases. It practices its powers by conceding or denying a petition for a writ of certiorari. The intermediate appellate courts are also referred to as court of appeals because they review the jurisdictions of the trial court and correct the apparent errors (Welch & Fuller, 2013). The high appellate courts are also called the courts of last resort, the superior courts, or the supreme courts. They have the power over all the lower courts, including the intermediate appellate courts. They rule on errors that happened in the intermediate appellate courts and in the trial courts, and also set precedents for themselves and all other inferior courts. This creates uniformity within the court system.

Based on this case, the court had the option of upholding the conviction because the man was willing to buy the drugs after I approached him. He did not hesitate to produce the 20 dollars and go with the substance, so he was used to buying drugs at that spot. It also had the option of staying a prosecution rather than ruling out the evidence that was not properly obtained, as is the case with the man who was entrapped. I initiated the man’s possession of drugs, since if I had not done it he would not have fallen into the trap. The courts have often adopted staying a prosecution in relation to entrapment cases (Spencer & Spencer, 2013). The court could also decide that there is no entrapment when, I, the government informant, supplied drugs to that man since he was predisposed to commit the crime. The judge could also refuse an application to exclude the evidence as unfairly obtained, and dismiss the appeal against conviction. Apart from upholding the conviction, the court can reverse the conviction agreeing that the man was entrapped.

In case the appellate court found the defense valid and reversed the judgment, I would be held liable civilly, on the basis that I misused the government power by leading an innocent person to commit a manufactured crime. The defendant should prove that entrapment occurred. He should prove that I, the law enforcement agent in that case, approached him and introduced that idea of buying theard, the defendant should be in a position to prove that the actions of the law enforcement would have made any other law-abiding citizen to commit a crime. He should also prove that he did not have a predisposition to commit the crime. Then the jury must find him innocent for them to reverse the judgment.

In conclusion, the qualifications of police actions as entrapment depend on the facts of a given situation, and the objective and the subjective standards used in the case. In most cases, law enforcement has succeeded in exposing crimes in the society by using this method of entrapment.

References

Acker, J. & Irving, R. (1998). Basic legal research for criminal justice and the social sciences. Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Spencer, M. & Spencer, J. (2013). Evidence concentrate: law revision and study guide. Oxford, OX: Oxford University Press.

Welch, C. & Fuller, J. (2013). American criminal courts: legal process and social context. Sidney: George Newnes Publishers.