Case Name: Maureen FAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2011-04-08
Citations: 58 So. 3d 376
Docket Number: No. 5D10-796
Parties: Maureen FAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: MONACO, C.J. and TORPY, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 58
Pages: 376–376

Head Matter:
Maureen FAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D10-796.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
April 8, 2011.
James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Christopher S. Quarles and Colby Nicole Ferris, Assistant Public Defenders, Dayto-na Beach, for Appellant.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kristen L. Davenport, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

Opinion:
GRIFFIN, J.
Maureen Fay ["Fay"] appeals her judgments and sentences for trafficking in twenty-eight grams or more of oxycodone and possession of drug paraphernalia. Fay argues that the trial court erred by denying her motions for judgment of acquittal based upon entrapment.
We conclude that the trial court did not err by denying the motions for judgment of acquittal based upon entrapment. First, with respect to objective entrapment, the evidence presented at trial does not establish the outrageous conduct on the part of law enforcement or the confidential informant that would render the prosecution of Fay for having sold the pills a due process violation. Second, because there existed a dispute of facts regarding the issues of inducement and predisposition, the trial court properly submitted the evaluation of subjective entrapment to the jury.
AFFIRMED.
MONACO, C.J. and TORPY, J., concur.