Case Citator › Sorrells v. United States

Sorrells v. United States

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
287 U.S. 435
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
118 of 118
Citing cases (total)
118
Treatment dates
1972
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. Sorrells v. United States remains controlling federal law, although one circuit criticized its explanation of entrapment. All 118 flagged citations have been read; the confirmed criticism is listed below.
More on how this was screened

The Seventh Circuit called the opinion's rationale anomalous while applying its principles to government participation in a crime. North Dakota and Pennsylvania adopted different entrapment tests for prosecutions under their own laws; those state choices are noted separately and do not displace Sorrells in federal prosecutions.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

118 later cases cite Sorrells v. United States; 118 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Sorrells v. United States?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The Seventh Circuit called Sorrells's rationale anomalous because its concern with government inducement extends beyond ordinary principles of criminal liability.

    United States v. McGrath · Seventh Circuit · filed

    The rationale for the entrapment defense was articulated in great detail in Sorrells. ... But the opinion is anomalous in some respects. Though discussed in terms of the defendant's complicity, it seems clear that the rationale for the defense rests outside the purview of traditional principles of criminal liability.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Sorrells v. United States and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace