United States Court of Appeals, eleventh circuit v. Monte Dale Thompson
From 1987 to 1989 Mr. Thompson committed numerous felonies. In 1992 he was indicted and charged with five counts of illegal possession of a firearm and making false official statements.
Because of his informant status he claimed that he was promised immunity for all of his crimes with the exception of murder.
In April 1992 Thompson filed a dismissal of indictment due to his agreement of working as a confidential informant with the AUSA, FBI, and Local Authorities. In May 1992 the district court denied motion to dismiss the indictment. In 1993 the government filed a motion to in limine which prohibit the defense of presenting any evidence to prove the reason why Thompson possessed a firearm. Thompson tried to present a defense by entrapment by estoppel but the court granted the prosecution motion in limine which prohibit Mr. Thompson from presenting his defense by entrapment by estoppel. Thompson was allowed to make a statement to the jury in camera but was not able to present any evidence to support his testimony due to court denial of the defense preposition of entrapment by estoppel. A jury convicted Thompson on four of the five possession charges against him and two counts of false official statements. Thompson filed a motion for a new trial based on the judge’s decision to allow the goverment to proceed with limine. The motion got denied, at which point he filed his notice to Appeal on march 29 1993. …show more content…
When the district court granted the government the motion in limine it reached conclusion that entrapment by estoppel was not