Background

• Informant recruited by DCI as part of a drug investigation in exchange for a charge reduction.
• Nelson’s name appeared on the informant’s list; informant contacted her about cocaine.
• Undercover setup: informant delivered $100 to Nelson at Papa John’s; Nelson exchanged a substance later identified as cocaine (1 gram).
• Arrest warrant issued ten months later; Nelson charged with delivering cocaine under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-1031(a)(i).
• Nelson moved for Rule 404(b) notice; defense requested entrapment instruction; court declined both pretrial and at trial.
• Trial court admitted challenged evidence and convicted Nelson; sentence imposed but suspended with probation; Nelson appealed.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Swartz v. State, 971 P.2d 137 (Wyo. 1998) (entrapment inducement standard; predisposition requirement; entrapment defense factual issues for jury)
• Higby v. State, 485 P.2d 380 (Wyo. 1971) (undue persuasion/inducement must be shown; mere opportunity not enough)
• Noetzelmann v. State, 721 P.2d 579 (Wyo. 1986) (no entrapment where police set up but did not induce)
• Rivera v. State, 846 P.2d 1 (Wyo. 1993) (entrapment analysis; test of government inducement vs. opportunity)
• Janski v. State, 538 P.2d 271 (Wyo. 1975) (jury questions on predisposition when informant entrapment argues coercion)
• Iseli v. State, 2007 WY 102, 160 P.3d 1133 (Wyoming 2007) (entrapment instruction when evidence supports theory)
• Reay v. State, 176 P.3d 647 (Wyo. 2008) (abuse of discretion in 404(b) admission; necessity of notice)
• Schreibvogel v. State, 228 P.3d 874 (Wyo. 2010) (nonintentional 404(b) testimony; notice requirement depends on prosecutorial intent)
• Roden v. State, 225 P.3d 497 (Wyo. 2010) (opening the door to evidence can affect admissibility; redirect proper scope)