US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

SORRELLS V. UNITED STATES, 287 U. S. 435 (1932)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 287 U. S. 435 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (1932)

Sorrells v. United States

No. 177

Argued November 8, 1932

Decided December 19, 1932

287 U.S. 435


1. Where application of a penal statute, according to its literal meaning, would produce results contrary to the plain purpose and policy of the enactment, and flagrantly unjust, another construction should be adopted if possible. P. 287 U. S. 446.

2. The National Prohibition Act, though denouncing generally as criminal the sale of intoxicating liquor for beverage purposes, was chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 287 U. S. 436

not intended to apply where the sale is instigated by a prohibition agent for the purpose of luring a person, otherwise innocent, to the commission of the crime so that he may be arrested and punished. P. 287 U. S. 448.

3. The defense of entrapment cannot be attributed to any power in the courts to grant immunity or defeat prosecution when a penal statute has been violated; it depends upon the scope of the statute alleged to have been violated -- i.e., whether the statute should be construed as intending to apply in the particular case. P. 287 U. S. 449.

4. That the issue of entrapment will involve collateral inquiries as to the activities of government agents and as to the conduct and purposes of the defendant previous to the alleged offense is not a valid reason for rejecting entrapment as a defense. P. 287 U. S. 451.

5. Entrapment is available as a defense under a plea of not guilty; it need not be set up by a special plea in bar. P. 287 U. S. 452.

6. Evidence of entrapment in this case held such that it should have been submitted to the jury. P. 287 U. S. 452.

57 F.2d 973 reversed.

Certiorari to review the affirmance of a sentence for violation of the Prohibition Act. The certiorari was limited to the question whether evidence on the issue of entrapment was sufficient to go to the jury. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 287 U. S. 438

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™