State of Arizona, Appellee v. Maverick Kemp Gray, Appellant

Summary

The Arizona Supreme Court held that Arizona's statutory entrapment defense requires a defendant to affirmatively admit the substantial elements of the charged offense, and that merely declining to contest the State's evidence is insufficient. The court further held that other evidence may establish an admission, but Gray's recorded statements did not affirmatively admit the charged drug-sale offense, so the trial court properly refused an entrapment instruction. Justice Bolick, dissenting, would have construed the statute to permit Gray's defense and would have found serious unconstitutional-conditions and self-incrimination concerns.