United States v. John Smith, 792 F.3d 760

Mr. Smith, a part-time police officer and business owner, was investigated for tax crimes and other offenses, leading to an ATF undercover sting with confidential informant Roberson.
Roberson, an informant with prior gang associations and criminal history, introduced Smith to undercover agents to test if he would provide security for drug transactions.
Over multiple meetings, Smith expressed readiness to assist with protection, arranged firearms, and discussed money and violence as part of the operation.
Smith accompanied Danny on two runs, transported drugs, carried firearms, and engaged in arranging the transfer of weapons to a purported drug dealer.
A grand jury indicted Smith on conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, counts of attempting to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, transferring firearms knowing they would be used in drug trafficking, and multiple firearms enhancements; the district court dismissed one firearm count; Smith unsuccessfully challenged entrapment at trial.
The district court rejected Smith’s entrapment defense; at sentencing he was found to have obstructed justice and was sentenced to the mandatory minimum; Smith appealed arguing due process was violated by governmental coercion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether government conduct violated due process via outrageous conduct or entrapment.	Smith contends government action coerced entry into crime.	Government argues entrapment doctrine and lack of coercive inducement.	No due process violation; entrapment defense rejected.
Whether Smith was predisposed to commit the charged crimes.	Smith asserts lack of predisposition due to government inducement.	Government shows Smith was ready and willing to participate.	Smith was predisposed; not entitled to entrapment defense.

United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423 (Supreme Court 1973) (limits of government conduct and due process in creating crime)
Hampton v. United States, 425 U.S. 484 (Supreme Court 1976) (entrapment and remedies under law rather than due process)
United States v. Duncan, 896 F.2d 271 (7th Cir. 1990) (plain error review standard for unraised issues)
United States v. Mayfield, 771 F.3d 417 (7th Cir. 2014) (entrapment defined as government solicitation plus additional risk)
United States v. Westmoreland, 712 F.3d 1066 (7th Cir. 2013) (outrageous government conduct defense disallowed in circuit)
United States v. Kaminski, 703 F.2d 1004 (7th Cir. 1983) (investigative officers may go far in concert without constituting outrageous conduct)