State v. Nelson
2017 MT 168N
| Mont. | 2017Background
- Byron Nelson was charged with criminal distribution of dangerous drugs after selling marijuana to a confidential informant.
- Nelson moved to dismiss, asserting entrapment as a matter of law; a hearing was held where Nelson and the arresting officer testified.
- The District Court denied the motion, finding genuine issues of material fact precluded resolution as a matter of law and that entrapment was for a jury.
- Nelson entered a guilty plea pursuant to an agreement that preserved his right to appeal the denial of the entrapment motion.
- On appeal, the Supreme Court reviewed the denial de novo, viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the State.
- Key factual dispute: whether Nelson had previously sold drugs to the informant (Nelson denied; informant, via officer testimony, allegedly said prior sale occurred), which affects predisposition analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether entrapment can be decided as a matter of law | State: evidence and inferences favor the State; genuine factual disputes exist | Nelson: entrapment occurred as a matter of law and dismissal was required | Court: Denial affirmed — genuine factual disputes (predisposition) make entrapment a jury question |
| Burden of proof for entrapment | State: defendant bears burden to prove entrapment | Nelson: met burden as a matter of law | Court: burden on defendant; Nelson did not eliminate factual disputes |
| Proper standard of review for motion to dismiss | State: review de novo; view evidence favorably to State | Nelson: same but argued facts compelled legal finding | Court: applied de novo review and viewed evidence favorably to State; District Court correct |
| Use of informant statements through officer testimony | State: officer testimony admissible; no hearsay objection preserved | Nelson: challenged reliance on informant’s prior conduct to show predisposition | Court: Nelson did not object to hearsay; officer testimony created factual dispute about prior sale |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Reynolds, 104 P.3d 1056 (Mont. 2004) (standard for reviewing denial of motion to dismiss; view evidence in light most favorable to State)
- State v. Kyong Cha Kim, 779 P.2d 512 (Mont. 1989) (defendant bears burden to prove entrapment)
- State v. Grenfell, 564 P.2d 171 (Mont. 1977) (entrapment requires lack of predisposition; prior conduct can defeat entrapment)