25 F.3d 1558: United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Monte Dale Thompson, Defendant-appellant
Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia
Parties to the case: F. Robert Raley, Macon, GA, for appellant and Edgar Ennis, U.S. Atty., Dixie A. Morrow, Asst. U.S. Atty., Macon, GA, for appellee.
Facts: Thompson did stipulate to the fact that he had pawned and possessed numerous firearms. He also did specify that he signed the transaction records which were wrongly mentioned in the previous conviction of an offense when he did pawn the firearms. In sequence to this conviction, Thompson, based on the entrapment by estoppel, filed a motion for the ...view middle of the document...
The point here was the government does not challenge that prosecutors might enter into any such informal agreements with criminal defendants. The district court was not convinced with the contract by applying the foundation of principles of contract. The decision came out as the Entrapment by Estoppel Defense in section 922 cases.
The case was reversed in part. Affirmed in part and Remanded for new trial
Conclusion: Thompson did file a motion dismissing the impeachment for abuse of discretion of prosecution in 1993. He supported his comment by saying that at the time of allegations he was involved with federal and local law agencies in investigating local narcotics dealer. As a result of his assistance several people were arrested, convicted and prosecuted. But the law does not permit to do such action on the basis of this. Thus they call for remanding as Thompson was not allowed to provide evidence of his entrapment.
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. SIXTY ACRES IN ETOWAH COUNTY, Evelyn Charlene Ellis, Defendants-Appellees
Facts: FBI, Albama Bureau of Investigation and the Etowah County Narcotics Task Force conducted on January 31, 1989, a buy bust to defend a real property which was under the name of his wife as claimed by Evelyn Charlene Ellis, saying she holds the title. A confidential informant, Philip Tarvin provided list in which the name of Mr., Ellis was there to have something with drug dealings. Tarvin contacted to Mr. Ellis at the place which was shared by both husband and wife, Then Mr. Tarvin also followed Mr. Ellis in the rear part of the house where there is a garbage bag retrieved by Mr. Ellis which was located in some weeds . Mr Ellis did pull 6 plastic bags from the same garbage bag and advised that it is a 3 pounds of pot, but Mr. Tarvina sked if he has some sample of marijuana and then declared, “ This smells like good stuff”. With the listening device he was carrying, these words prompted the agents monitoring the device to advance. The proclaimer recognized the approach of agent and escaped from back of the house. Mr. Ellis could not pass the marijuana to Mr. Tarvin as he refused to take it so he carried it with him. The agents could not locate him that evening but they got the bags of marijuana from the rear of the house.
The appellant challenged the findings of the district court that the claimant never agreed to any such drug activities by her husband. But the undisputed record says that she did giver her consent to the drug activities within the meaning of forfeiture act. But the claimant asserts that she did this out of fear.
This is a duress defense, when the coercive party threatens to do an immediate harm, in such cases coerced party cannot escape reasonably. Mrs. Ellis was cared from her husband; this grants her sympathy but not a right to involve in an illegal activity. In the record there is nothing which suggests that Mrs. Ellis was given an immediate retaliation by her...