◆ SpookStack

41 most cases, where a defendant's predisposition has been: established. Hampton presents a more complex picture. There, three justices voted to solidify the subjective approach so that under no circumstances, regardless of how egregious the. governmental conduct, could a defendant who was found by a jury to have been predisposed to commit the crime have the indictment dismissed for governmental misconduct. 425 US 484. Three other justices believed that the circum- stances showed that governmental officials had purposefully created the crime in Hampton and that such creative activity “oo by governmental officials required dismissal despite defen- dant's predisposition to commit the crime. 425 US at 495 (Brennan,: J., dissenting). Two other justices in an opinion . “written by Justice Powell found that Hampton was controlled | by Russell, that Hampton: had not even raised the issue of predisposition, and that his entrapment defense, there- = fore, failed for lack of proof. . 425 US at 490 (Powell, J., concurring). Justice Powell declined, however, to close the door entirely upon the possibility of court inter- vention in an extreme case. He refused to accept the premise . "that, no matter what the circumstances, neither due process principles nor [the Supreme Court's] supervisory power _ could support a bar to conviction in any case where the. * % . . a " , . » - ‘ Stes : . owe oe oe a c . “ - - . ns * - fos Ae * ma eo * i wan _—