Opinion ID: 475757
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Pre-targeting Specific Individuals

Text: 45 It emerges unmistakably from the record in this case that the Government's actions are of the sort proscribed in Williamson. As we have acknowledged elsewhere, Williamson has been subsequently limited to require reversal of a conviction only when the specific defendant was picked out for the informer's efforts by a government agent. Onori, 535 F.2d at 942 (citing four 5th Circuit cases). That initial condition is easily met in the present case. 46 Informant Kelly testified at trial as follows: 47 Q. All right. What were your instructions? What were you asked to do? 48 A. I was asked to infiltrate, gather information for intelligence, and report. 49 Q. Any particular individual here in Laredo? A. Yes. Bill Nelson 50 Tr. at 297. Later in his testimony Kelly stated that my job was to infiltrate and report on Bill Nelson. Id. at 312. In the face of this uncontradicted testimony the Government wisely concedes that Nelson was indeed pre-targeted: In the instant case, informant Kelly was instructed to 'infiltrate, gather information for intelligence, and report' on appellant William Nelson (Tr. 297), and it therefore appears that Nelson was, in fact, a government-pretargeted potential defendant. Appellee's Brief at 31. 6