In Muse v. In his response and subsequent communications, the defendant communicated his desire to engage in sexual acts with someone he thought was a 14 year-old girl.
Throughthe two established a time and location for the encounter—a motel in North Georgia. The defendant then traveled 90 miles to the hotel parking lot.
Five members of the task force also arrived in the parking lot at the meeting time, in unmarked cars and wearing shirts with FBI task force inia. Two agents parked near the defendant in order to confirm his identity.
The defendant subsequently left the parking lot at a high rate of speed, but was stopped and arrested soon after. The defendant asserted an affirmative defense of abandonment.
The Court acknowledged that the defendant left the parking lot immediately after law enforcement agents arrived wearing FBI task force inia. Based on this evidence, the Court of Appeals held that a reasonable jury could conclude that Muse believed the presence of the law enforcement officers increased the probability that he would be apprehended.
According to the Court, this finding would be reasonable even if the jury concluded that the defendant did not know the individuals parked in the lot were law enforcement officers.
Since it was for the jury to decide whether the State had disproved the affirmative defense, and because the jury so decided, the Court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. In Rutledge v.
Each year, hundreds of Georgians are arrested in internet sting operations conducted by both the ICAC task force and local…. September 23,