State v. Powell
Supreme Court of Hawaii
726 P.2d 266 (1986)
- Written by Samantha Arena, JD
Facts
The Honolulu Police Department decided to conduct several drunk-decoy operations in response to elevated instances of theft and robbery. After conducting 11 of these operations, 19 people were arrested, including Laverne Powell (defendant). During the operation that concluded with Powell’s arrest, a police officer was lying on the ground with a paper bag containing a beer bottle and pretending to be drunk. The officer had a wallet located in his back pocket with money protruding from the wallet in plain sight. Powell walked by the officer, turned back, and stole the wallet from the officer’s pocket. Two undercover officers detained Powell as she was attempting to leave the area. Powell was charged with theft. Prior to trial, Powell moved for dismissal, arguing that the undisputed facts, as testified to by the officer who organized the operation in question, established entrapment. Hawaii’s entrapment statute, Hawaii Revised Statutes § 702-237, provides an affirmative defense for a defendant who engages in prohibited conduct because of inducement by a law enforcement officer who creates a substantial risk that the offense will be committed by persons other than those ready to commit it. The trial court granted Powell’s motion to dismiss.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.