Editing Entrapment (section)

=== Entrapment by estoppel ===
A subset of the entrapment defense was first recognized by the Supreme Court in ''Raley v. Ohio''.<ref>''Raley v. Ohio'' {{ussc|360|423|1959}}</ref> There, four defendants were testifying before a committee of the Ohio State Legislature. The chairman of the committee told them that they could [[Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution|assert their right against self-incrimination]]. They asserted this right, and refused to answer questions. However, Ohio law provided them immunity from prosecution, so the right against self-incrimination was inapplicable, and they were subsequently prosecuted for their failure to answer questions. The Supreme Court overturned three of the four convictions based on the doctrine of entrapment by [[estoppel]]. (The fourth refused to state his address, at which point the committee expressed the view that the right against self-incrimination did not apply to that question.)

As described in ''United States v. Howell'',<ref>''United States v. Howell'', [http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/37/37.F3d.1197.93-2139.93-1307.html 37 F.3d 1197], 1204 (7th Cir. 1994)</ref> the defense "applies when, acting with actual or apparent authority, a government official affirmatively assures the defendant that certain conduct is legal and the defendant reasonably believes that official".

The entrapment by estoppel defense exists in both federal and city jurisdictions; however, case law remains inconsistent as to whether the misleading advice of e.g. a state official provides protection against federal criminal charges.  Examples exist of an appellate court failing to allow an entrapment by estoppel defense where a municipal official provided misleading instructions regarding a state law.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.metnews.com/articles/2004/chac041504.htm|title=C.A. Bars Former Councilwoman's 'Entrapment by Estoppel' Defense}}</ref>