People v. Lewis

This case presents question as to whether defendant's trial counsel was ineffective in instant prosecution on charges of involuntary sexual servitude of minor, traveling to meet minor and grooming, where trial counsel, in presenting entrapment defense, failed to: (1) provide definition of "predisposed," when jury requested such definition and instead acquiesced to trial court's decision not to answer jury's question; (2) present to jury fact that defendant had no criminal record; and (3) object to State's mischaracterization of entrapment defense during closing argument. Appellate Court, in reversing defendant's convictions on all charges and remanding for new trial, found that trial court should have submitted definition of "predisposed," where common understanding of said term did not focus jury on correct timeframe for its predisposition analysis. Moreover, Appellate Court found that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to mention defendant's lack of criminal history, since such testimony was strong evidence demonstrating lack of predisposition, and for failing to object to prosecutor's statements during closing argument that improperly suggested that jury had to initially find existence of inducement in order for defendant's entrapment defense to prevail.