In relation to entrapment, what are two conditions that can lead to entrapment under the objective approach?

• A. the defendant's preexisting intent and non-governmental coercion
• B. the state providing an essential element or coercive pressure
• C. independent criminal planning by the defendant and police informant involvement
• D. no involvement by the state

Answer: (B)

In the objective approach to entrapment, the focus is on the government's conduct and whether it creates the situation that would tempt a normally law‑abiding person to commit a crime. There are two ways this can happen: the state provides an essential element of the offense, or the state uses coercive pressure to push someone into committing it. When law enforcement supplies what is needed to commit the crime (an essential element) or applies coercive pressure (threats, inducements, extensive pressure), entrapment can be said to occur under the objective standard.

That’s why the best answer is the one that describes the state providing an essential element or coercive pressure. It directly captures the two pathways the objective approach recognizes: the government supplies something necessary for the crime, or it creates coercive circumstances that push the person to commit the offense.

The other options don’t fit as cleanly with this standard. Focusing on the defendant’s preexisting intent and non-governmental coercion aligns more with the subjective approach. Mentioning independent planning with an informant doesn’t map neatly onto the two recognized objective-route conditions, and saying there’s no state involvement obviously wouldn’t trigger entrapment under the objective lens.