People v. Lewis

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of involuntary sexual servitude of a minor, traveling to meet a minor, and grooming, based on police sting operation. At trial, Defendant asserted the defense of entrapment. Counsel was ineffective for failing to offer a definition of "predisposed", in response to jury's request for legal definition of "predisposed", instead of acquiescing in court's decisions to instruct jurors to continue deliberating. "Predisposed has a narrower meaning, in context of entrapment defense, as compared to commonly understood meaning. Issue of Defendant's predisposition was the lynchpin of his defense, and jury should not have been allowed to labor under a misunderstanding of that concept. Counsel was ineffective for failing to present evidence that Defendant lacked a criminal record, as that is strong evidence showing lack of predisposition. Counsel unreasonably failed to object to mischaracterization of the burden of proof and to an improperly broad articulation of predisposition. Cumulative effect of counsel's deficient performance rendered proceeding unreliable. (JORGENSEN and BRIDGES, concurring.)