What constitutes a substantial step in internet sting attempt cases? State v. Smith Explained

In State v. Smith, the Utah Court of Appeals addressed when a defendant’s conduct in an internet sting operation constitutes a substantial step toward committing attempt crimes, clarifying the line between mere preparation and criminal attempts.

Background and Facts

An undercover detective created an online persona as an attractive young woman on a “hookup” site. Smith responded to the detective’s post, and during a three-hour conversation, the detective revealed that “she” was 13 years old and a runaway seeking transportation to California. Smith sent explicit photos, discussed sexual acts, and arranged to meet the “girl” at a convenience store. Upon arriving at the location, Smith parked his vehicle, contacted the girl via text, directed her to a specific location, and flashed his headlights as a signal for her to approach his car. Officers arrested Smith at that point.

Key Legal Issues

Smith challenged his bindover on attempt charges, arguing his conduct constituted mere solicitation rather than a substantial step toward the crimes. He also moved to dismiss all charges on entrapment grounds, claiming law enforcement induced him to commit crimes he was not otherwise ready to commit.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court distinguished this case from State v. Arave and State v. Johnson, where defendants’ actions constituted only solicitation or preparation. Here, Smith’s solicitation was accepted, and he took concrete steps beyond mere preparation: arranging a specific meeting location, traveling there, parking strategically, reestablishing contact, and directing the victim to his vehicle. The court noted that requiring physical contact with an actual victim would make convictions impossible in internet sting cases involving fictitious victims.

Regarding entrapment, the court found no improper pressure or coercion. The detective provided multiple “outs” during the conversation, including revealing the persona’s age, asking for help rather than demanding sexual acts, and even telling Smith to “fuck off.” Smith consistently pursued the interaction despite these opportunities to withdraw.

Practice Implications

This decision establishes that in internet sting cases, traveling to a prearranged meeting location with intent to commit sexual offenses typically satisfies the substantial step requirement for attempt charges. The ruling aligns Utah with the majority of jurisdictions that have addressed similar internet sting scenarios. For entrapment defenses, practitioners should focus on whether law enforcement employed improper pressure or appeals to sympathy, rather than merely providing opportunities for criminal conduct.