State v. Cartwright

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed Thomas Reese Cartwright’s conviction for felony enticing a child through use of the internet. The court held that Idaho Code section 18-1509A was not facially overbroad under the First Amendment and that the trial court properly denied an entrapment instruction. The opinion addresses the statutory relationship between sections 18-1509A and 18-1506 and distinguishes inducement from merely providing an opportunity to commit a crime.

Holdings

1. Idaho Code section 18-1509A is not unconstitutionally overbroad because, when read together with the incorporated provisions of section 18-1506, it targets the knowing use of the internet or a communications device to entice a child to engage in sexual conduct and does not regulate a substantial amount of constitutionally protected expressive conduct.
2. The district court properly refused to instruct the jury on entrapment because the evidence did not provide substantial support for a finding that the State induced Cartwright to commit the offense contrary to an otherwise innocent predisposition; the undercover detective provided an opportunity, not the criminal design.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Idaho Code section 18-1509A is facially overbroad under the First Amendment because it incorporates provisions of Idaho Code section 18-1506.
2. Whether the district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on entrapment.

Disposition

affirmed