State v. Hatchett, 462 P.3d 1288

Hatchett posted a sexually explicit Craigslist ad titled “Dad looking for Son (Provo)” seeking men 18–25 and mentioning drugs and sexual activity.
An undercover Utah AG Internet Crimes Against Children special agent posed as a 13–14-year-old boy (“Cade”) and responded to the ad; they exchanged texts and calls over several weeks.
Cade repeatedly said he was “almost 14”; Hatchett repeatedly steered conversations sexual, offered to procure alcohol/drugs, asked for sexual details, and initiated substantially more contact (≈16 texts, 3 calls) than the agent.
Hatchett arrived at the agreed meeting place and was arrested; hotel search revealed drugs and drug paraphernalia; he was charged with two counts of enticement of a minor and drug offenses.
Hatchett moved to dismiss on entrapment grounds, arguing law enforcement created a substantial risk of the offense by posing as a minor and initiating contact; the district court denied the motion, finding the agent merely afforded an opportunity.
The court of appeals affirmed, applying the objective entrapment standard and distinguishing this case from prior entrapment reversals because the agent did not persistently induce the offense and Hatchett actively pursued the contact after learning Cade’s age.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hatchett was entrapped as a matter of law	Special Agent’s undercover contact and persona created a substantial risk and induced the offense; absent police contact no crime would have occurred	Agent merely provided an opportunity; agent had reason to investigate post-ad and did not use high-pressure or repeated inducements; Hatchett repeatedly pursued contact after Cade revealed his age	Affirmed denial of dismissal: objective standard not met; agent’s conduct did not create substantial risk of inducing a person not otherwise ready to commit the offense

State v. Taylor, 599 P.2d 496 (Utah 1979) (adopts objective entrapment standard; decoys permissible absent active inducement)
State v. Kourbelas, 621 P.2d 1238 (Utah 1980) (reversed where officer first suggested crime and repeatedly solicited an otherwise unconnected defendant)
State v. Torres, 16 P.3d 1242 (Utah 2000) (focuses entrapment inquiry on police conduct under objective standard)
State v. Haltom, 121 P.3d 42 (Utah Ct. App. 2005) (entrapment involves mixed question of law and fact; appellate review limited where factual findings uncontested)
State v. Martinez, 848 P.2d 702 (Utah Ct. App. 1993) (examples of improper inducement include high-pressure tactics and appeals to vulnerability)