236 N.C. App. 648
N.C. Ct. App.2014Background
- Defendant Melissa Ott was convicted by a jury of trafficking in 28 grams or more of opium by sale; trafficking by possession; and possession with intent to sell.
- Confidential informant Emily Eudy approached Ott and arranged an undercover drug sale with the Rowan County Sheriff’s Office.
- Detective Kevin Black conducted the undercover sale, with Eudy providing pills and coaching Ott during the encounter.
- Ott sold the undercover officer 34.2 grams of hydrocodone/acetaminophen pills, with pills supplied by Eudy.
- Ott testified she was a drug user, not a seller, and that Eudy planned the sale and supplied the pills; Eudy disputed Ott’s denial of selling drugs.
- The trial court refused Ott’s request to instruct the jury on entrapment, ruling Ott had predisposed to commit the crime; Ott was convicted and sentenced.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether entrapment instruction should have been given | State contends Ott was predisposed; no entrapment required | Ott contends Eudy induced the crime and supplied the drugs | Entrapment instruction required; evidence supported inducement and lack of predisposition |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jamerson, 64 N.C. App. 301, 307 S.E.2d 436 (1983) (establishes inducement evidence supports entrapment instruction)
- State v. Stanley, 288 N.C. 19, 215 S.E.2d 589 (1975) (undercover inducement showing crime originated with police)
- State v. Thompson, 141 N.C. App. 698, 543 S.E.2d 160 (2001) (rule that mere opportunity from informants not entrapment; distinguishable facts if inducement shown)
- State v. Branham, 153 N.C. App. 91, 569 S.E.2d 24 (2002) (entrapment requires jury instruction when evidence supports entrapment defense)
- State v. Hageman, 307 N.C. 1, 296 S.E.2d 433 (1982) (predisposition rule; entrapment defense requires inducement evidence)