
    Lori DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D99-2590.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Sept. 13, 2000.
    Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Susan D. Cline, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sarah B. Mayer, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Lori Davis, appeals her conviction and sentence on the charges of trafficking in cocaine and possession of cannabis. She raises as her argument on appeal that she was entrapped under both the subjective and objective standards of entrapment, and that her conviction and sentence must be reversed and remanded to the trial court with directions that the charges against her be discharged. We find appellant’s argument to be unpersuasive and affirm.

While we share some of the concerns expressed in the concurring opinion as to the actions of the confidential informant, it was ultimately a jury question as to whether this conduct rises to the level of entrapment. The jury ultimately rejected appellant’s entrapment defense.

AFFIRMED.

POLEN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

GARDINER, ANA I., Associate Judge, concurs specially with opinion.

GARDINER, ANA I., Associate Judge,

concurring.

I agree that this case should be affirmed; however, I disapprove of the tactics employed by the confidential informant. The record indicates that the informant engaged in a sexual relationship with the appellant in order to get her to supply him with cocaine. Although it is also clear that the appellant was predisposed to engage in this type of drug activity, it is totally unacceptable for law enforcement or anyone acting as an agent for law enforcement, to engage in sexual relations with the suspect in order to accomplish his goal. Activity such as this is socially unacceptable. Accusations of sexual activity, especially when true, blur the culpability of the accused and make more difficult the responsibility of the courts in distinguishing when a defendant has been illegally entrapped.  