S1:E1 “U.S. v. Archibald Hark / Un Mémoire Juridique”
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The United States brought criminal charges against Archibald Hark in the United States District Court for the District of Guam, alleging distribution of heroin in violation of Title 21 U.S.C. Section 841(a)(1). The jury issued a guilty verdict, rejecting entrapment as a defense. The defense filed a Rule 29 motion for acquittal notwithstanding the jury verdict, arguing entrapment as a matter of law. After new evidence emerged days after the trial ended, the defense moved for a new trial under Rule 33. The district court judge denied both motions and the defense appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Entrapment is available as a defense for a defendant who was induced by a government agent to commit a crime for which he had no predisposition. Agent Lopez pressured a reluctant Archibald Hark to sell heroin, an idea Hark had never considered and thought was crazy. Could no rational juror conclude that the government disproved entrapment?
New evidence uncovered after the trial revealed that Lopez targeted Hark before meeting him, misrepresented evidence of Hark’s hesitation to sell drugs, and even created a financial crisis for Hark. Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying Hark a new trial?