Section 99-1-25 - Entrapment; affirmative defense to criminal prosecution; burden of proof(1) It is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge that the person was entrapped. To claim entrapment, the person must admit by the person's testimony or other evidence the substantial elements of the offense charged.(2) A person who asserts an entrapment defense has the burden of proving each of the following by clear and convincing evidence: (a) The idea of committing the offense was initiated by law enforcement officers or their agents rather than by the person.(b) The law enforcement officers or their agents urged and induced the person to commit the offense.(c) The person was not predisposed to commit the type of offense charged before the law enforcement officers or their agents urged and induced the person to commit the offense.(3) A person does not establish entrapment if the person was predisposed to commit the offense and the law enforcement officers or their agents merely provided the person with an opportunity to commit the offense. It is not entrapment for law enforcement officers or their agents merely to use a ruse or to conceal their identity, nor is it entrapment for law enforcement officers or their agents to supply, furnish or sell contraband to an individual where: (a) There is a reasonable indication, based on information developed through informants or other means, that the subject is engaging, has engaged, or is likely to engage in illegal activity of a similar type; or(b) The opportunity for illegal activity has been structured so that there is reason for believing that persons drawn to the opportunity, or brought to it, are predisposed to engage in the contemplated illegal activity.(4) The issue of entrapment shall be tried by the trier of fact. The conduct of law enforcement officers and their agents may be considered in determining if a person has proven entrapment. Laws, 2005, ch. 463, § 7, eff. 7/1/2005.