Voluntary intoxication is rarely a successful complete defense, but it can reduce culpability. Unlike involuntary intoxication, voluntary intoxication is never a defense to a general intent crime.
Is voluntary intoxication a defense to a specific intent crime?
However, voluntary intoxication may be used as a defense to specific intent crimes if, as with involuntary intoxication, it prevents the defendant from forming the criminal intent necessary to commit the crime.
What are the different types of intoxication defenses?
Intoxication 1 The Criminal Defense of Intoxication. Intoxication is a defense available to criminal defendants on the basis that, because of the intoxication, the defendant did not understand the nature of his ... 2 Involuntary Intoxication. ... 3 Voluntary Intoxication. ...
Can a defence plead intoxicated?
Previously, even for crimes of general intent such as manslaughter, assault or sexual assault, it was possible for the defence to plead voluntary intoxication by stating that the accused was practically unconscious at the time of the events. Since the legislative amendment of this section a few years ago, this is no longer possible.
What is intoxication in a criminal case?
Intoxication is a defense available to criminal defendants on the basis that, because of the intoxication, the defendant did not understand the nature of his or her actions or know what he or she was doing.
What happens if an involuntary person becomes violent?
What is general intent?
What is an example of a crime?
What is the defense of intoxication?
Does voluntary intoxication reduce culpability?
Is involuntary intoxication a crime?
Is voluntary intoxication a complete defense?
See 4 more
About this website
Is intoxication a valid defense?
Intoxication is a defense available to criminal defendants on the basis that, because of the intoxication, the defendant did not understand the nature of his or her actions or know what he or she was doing.
How does intoxication fit into an Elements defense?
In order to successfully present the intoxication defense, a defendant must be charged with a specific intent crime, must show, by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that he or she was intoxicated, and he or she must present that intoxication as an explanation for their actions.
What type of defence is intoxication?
Intoxication and criminal liability. Intoxication is not a defence to a crime as such, but where a person is intoxicated through drink or drugs and commits a crime, the level of intoxication may be such as to prevent the defendant forming the necessary mens rea of the crime.
What type of defense is intoxication?
Intoxication is a defense available to defendants in criminal law cases. A defendant who raises this defense claims that he should not be held liable for a crime because his compromised mental state prevented him from forming the necessary mens rea.
Is intoxication a defence to criminal damage?
The essence of the law is that intoxication can provide a defence to crimes that are of specific intent, but not to those that are of basic intent. In crimes of specific intent, it must be proved that the defendant lacked the necessary mens rea at the time of the offence.
Is intoxication a defense to contract formation?
If you voluntarily entered into an intoxicated state, you have to assume that you will be held responsible for your actions while you were intoxicated. Typically, courts will not accept voluntary intoxication on its own as a defense to contract formation or enforcement.
Why is intoxication an aggravating factor?
Intoxication can suggest that the offender did not really know what they were doing or acted out of character. Yet on the other hand, intoxication can also be regarded as an aggravating factor suggesting a recklessness, lack of respect for others, or selfish disregard for the consequences. '
Is intoxication mitigating or aggravating circumstance?
"The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration as a mitigating circumstance when the offender has committed a felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit said felony; but when the intoxication is habitual or intentional it shall be considered ...
Is Being Intoxicated an Allowed Criminal Defense? | Nolo
People often make mistakes when drunk. Unfortunately for some, voluntary intoxication isn't a defense to or excuse for most criminal offenses.
Is Intoxication a Defense to a Crime? - Blanchard Law
Need Help! Find out about the ways to deal with debts if you are falling behind with day-to-day bills, loan and credit card repayments or other commitments.
Intoxication Case Summaries - LawTeacher.net
Cases On Intoxication. The defendant had been convicted of various counts alleging actual bodily harm, and assaults upon police officers. The offences had occurred after the defendant had consumed large quantities of alcohol and drugs.
Intoxication: Not a Defence for Crime - PHDessay.com
Essay on Intoxication: Not a Defence for Crime Intoxication: Not a Defence for Crime There has been too many times where intoxication was used as a defence in criminal cases where it should not have
Use of Voluntary Intoxication as a Defense to a General Intent Crime
217 Civic Center Drive, Suite 6 Vista, CA 92084 (760) 631-5151 phone (760) 631-5155 fax [email protected]
What is Martindale Nolo?
Nolo is a part of the Martindale Nolo network, which has been matching clients with attorneys for 100+ years.
What is partial defense?
Partial Defense. Even where voluntary intoxication is a potential defense to specific intent crimes, it often reduces the defendant's culpability, rather than let him or her off the hook. For example, assume one person, extremely inebriated, attacks another.
What is voluntary intoxication?
In general, "voluntary intoxication" describes a situation in which someone drinks alcohol to excess or takes illegal drugs. The resulting intoxication is voluntary in that the defendant chose to consume the substances and had reason to know of their intoxicating effect. (For comparison, see Is Involuntary Intoxication a Defense?)
How many wallets does Rob have?
After being dropped off at home and waking up the following morning, he realizes that he has two wallets: his and Joe's. Rob isn't guilty of theft by larceny, a specific intent crime that requires that the defendant take someone else's property while intending to permanently deprive the owner of it.
What to do if you are accused of a crime?
If you've been accused of a crime you allegedly committed while intoxicated, consult an experienced criminal defense attorney . There are wrinkles in the law on intoxication, and they can vary from state to state. A knowledgeable lawyer can fully advise you of the applicable law and protect your rights.
Does voluntary intoxication reduce culpability?
Even where voluntary intoxication is a potential defense to specific intent crimes, it often reduces the defendant's culpability, rather than let him or her off the hook. For example, assume one person, extremely inebriated, attacks another. Drunkenness might have prevented the attacker from forming the specific intent necessary to commit assault with intent to cause great bodily harm. But it probably won't absolve the assailant of liability for the general intent crime of simple assault.
Do people have to be accountable for their actions?
Legislators and courts have taken the attitude that, by and large, people must be accountable for their actions, regardless of whether they were operating with all their faculties. But courts will, on occasion, allow a defendant to present evidence of intoxication in order to disprove the mental state ("mens rea") required for an alleged offense.
What is involuntary intoxication?
Involuntary intoxication most commonly arises in cases where the suspect/defendant claims that their food or drink has been ‘spiked’ without their knowledge.
What is a crime of specific intent?
Crimes of specific intent have sometimes been stated to include crimes where the offence can only be committed intentionally i. e. where recklessness will not suffice (e.g. murder): R v Caldwell [1982] AC 341 HL.
What is ulterior intent?
Another definition often used is where the offence requires an ulterior intent i.e. one which requires proof of an intent which goes beyond the prohibited act (e.g. criminal damage with intent to endanger life): R v Heard [2007] 3 WLR 475.
Is intoxication a crime of basic intent?
Intoxication: Specific and Basic Intent. Voluntary intoxication is never a defence to a crime of basic intent. However, where the defendant has voluntarily put himself in the position of being intoxicated to the extent that he is incapable of forming the mental element of the offence, this will amount to a defence in respect of a crime ...
Is intoxication a defence?
Intoxication, whether voluntary or involuntary, is not a defence per se. However, where a person is intoxicated through drink or drugs and commits a crime, the level of intoxication may be such as to prevent that person from forming the necessary mens rea of the crime.
Which case provides a limited defence based on a genuine belief?
However, where a statute (e.g. Section 5 (2) (a) Criminal Damage Act 1971) provides a limited defence based on a genuine belief, the mistake may be relied on even where the mistake was induced by voluntary intoxication: Jaggard v Dickinson [1981] 1 QB 527.
Is automatism a defence to driving with alcohol?
In Scotland, the High Court of Justiciary has held that automatism cannot be established as a defence to a charge of driving with excess alcohol upon proof of a transitory state of parasomnia (sleep-walking) resulting from and induced by deliberate and self-induced intoxication: Finegan v Heywood, The Times, May 10, 2000. Although this decision is not binding upon the courts in England and Wales, it is a persuasive authority.
What is voluntary intoxication?
Voluntary intoxication refers to the situation where an individual willingly introduces into his or her body substances he or she knows, or ought to know, will cause intoxication; and it is self-induced. 3. The individual must choose to put the substance in his or her body as a result of free will, not by: trick.
What is a minor in possession in Colorado?
21 years old. People under 21 who possess or drink alcohol face charges for minor in possession (18-13-122 C.R.S.). This crime is abbreviated as MIP in Colorado. 1. What are the penalties? MIP is prosecuted as an unclassified petty offense. It carries no jail time. But defendants do face fines, community service, and substance abuse ...
When does voluntary intoxication contradict the existence of specific intent?
This means the defendant may raise voluntary intoxication as a defense when the evidence of intoxication contradicts the existence of specific intent when said intent is an element of the crime charged.
What does "not knowingly introduce" mean?
the individual did not knowingly introduce or allow the substance to be introduced into the body unless as a result of medical advice or other appropriate circumstances.
What is the first degree murder of Anne?
Example: Sally is charged with the first-degree murder of Anne. First-degree murder requires a “deliberate and premeditated killing of another with malice aforethought.” It also carries penalties of life imprisonment or even death. However, Sally was incredibly high on cocaine that night and argues that she was too intoxicated to form the specific intent to plan the murder. Instead, she argues that her charges should be reduced to second-degree murder, as she could not have pre-planned the killing.
What happens when an accused person successfully uses this defense?
When an accused person successfully uses this defense, it may lower the charges against him or her but will not result in the dismissal of charges.
Is intoxication a criminal offense in Colorado?
Colorado law recognizes voluntary and involuntary intoxication as a legal defense to criminal charges.
Why did the appellant not plead guilty to murder?
He had pleaded not guilty to murder on the ground that he lacked the specific intent for murder due to intoxication (he also pleaded diminished responsibility). The appellant offered a plea of guilty to manslaughter, but this was rejected by the prosecution who proceeded with the murder charge.
What is specific intent?
Specific intent denotes a high level of culpability or foresight on the part of the accused, and it is confined largely to a relatively small number of serious offences. Most criminal offences are satisfied by a lower level of foresight, namely awareness of the risk that one’s conduct will amount to the prohibited act or produce the prohibited consequence (recklessness). These are referred to as crimes of basic intent (as distinct from crimes of specific intent). Regular examples are manslaughter, and unlawfully damaging property belonging to another being reckless as to whether such property would be damaged.
What is the obligation on the prosecution to prove that, despite his intoxication, the accused actually formed the intent?
By comparison, the obligation on the prosecution to prove that, despite his intoxication, the accused actually formed the intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, as distinct from merely having the capacity to form such intent, is an assertion of coherent criminal law principle.
What is the second test?
On this basis, the key issue is whether the accused was so intoxicated that he did not actually form the specific intent required by the offence charged. It is not whether he was so intoxicated as to be incapable of forming that intent.
What are some examples of basic intent crimes?
Regular examples are manslaughter, and unlawfully damaging property belonging to another being reckless as to whether such property would be damaged.
How old was the appellant when he was convicted of murder?
The appellant was convicted of murdering his mother in a frenzied knife attack in the family home. He was 19 years of age at the time and had been a heavy abuser of drugs and alcohol continuously throughout his teenage years.
What is the pre-requisite for criminal liability?
Generally, a pre-requisite for liability in criminal law is foresight of the risk that one’s criminal act or omission will produce the prohibited consequence in the offence in question. If, as will often be the case, such foresight is lacking due to the effects of intoxication, it should follow that there is no criminal liability.
Is the amount of alcohol consumed sufficient?
Of course, it would not be possible to invoke this defence after consuming a light amount of alcohol, for example. The amount of alcohol consumed must be large enough to ensure that the intent could not have been formed in the accused’s mind, and that the accused was too intoxicated to understand the consequences of his actions. Canadian law indicates that the accused must be at least in an advanced state of intoxication before a judge can be convinced that the specific intent required was not present at the time the offence was committed. This defence will also be available in cases of extreme intoxication.
What can be done to minimize the consequences of a criminal charge?
In short, for offences of specific intent, voluntary intoxication can be invoked if the level of intoxication is high enough. However, the judge still has to be convinced. As you can see, this is not a foregone conclusion.
When can a defendant use a defence?
Indeed, a defendant can only use this defence when the offence requires a specific intent. In cases where the defence is open, the accused will then have to demonstrate, with a preponderance of evidence, that because of the intoxication, he or she was not in a position to know what he or she was doing, and therefore could not have formed ...
Can a defence plead voluntary intoxication?
Previously, even for crimes of general intent such as manslaughter, assault or sexual assault, it was possible for the defence to plead voluntary intoxication by stating that the accused was practically unconscious at the time of the events.
Is voluntary intoxication a defence?
However, although voluntary intoxication is a defence recognized under the Criminal Code, it cannot be invoked in all cases. To this end, when is it possible to invoke voluntary intoxication as a defence?
Can section 33.1 be invoked?
Parliament has clarified that, regardless of the degree of intoxication, section 33.1 cannot be invoked in a case of an offence of general intent where the physical well-being of a person is being violated.
Can you be found guilty of premeditated murder?
For example, in the case of premeditated murder, although it is possible to deny the specific intent related to this crime due to voluntary intoxication, one can be found guilty of the lesser and included offence of manslaughter.
What happens if an involuntary person becomes violent?
If an individual becomes violent as a result of an involuntary intoxication and commits an assault, he or she may be able to argue that the intoxication prevented him or her from forming the intent to cause harm.
What is general intent?
General intent = the intent to commit an act without the intent to achieve a specific result. Specific intent = the intent to commit an act and achieve a specific result. Involuntary intoxication can also be a defense to a general intent crime if the defendant can establish that the involuntary intoxication acted similarly to an insanity defense ...
What is an example of a crime?
A common example is the crime of assault, which requires an intent to cause harm. If an individual becomes violent as a result of an involuntary intoxication and commits an assault, ...
What is the defense of intoxication?
The Criminal Defense of Intoxication. Intoxication is a defense available to criminal defendants on the basis that, because of the intoxication, the defendant did not understand the nature of his or her actions or know what he or she was doing . The intoxication defense applies in very limited circumstances and typically depends on whether ...
Does voluntary intoxication reduce culpability?
In some cases, the defense of voluntary intoxication does not completely absolve the defendant of liability but instead reduces the overall culpability for the crime. Thus, the defendant might find charges reduced to a lesser crime if he or she successfully proves that intoxication limited his or her intent or comprehension of the crime.
Is involuntary intoxication a crime?
Involuntary intoxication may also occur as a result of an allergy to, or the unintended effects of, a legal prescription medication. If a charged crime is a specific intent crime, meaning that the criminal defendant must have had the specific intent to commit the crime in question, involuntary intoxication can be a defense to criminal charges ...
Is voluntary intoxication a complete defense?
Voluntary intoxication is rarely a successful complete defense, but it can reduce culpability.
Accountability
- Legislators and courts have taken the attitude that, by and large, people must be accountable for their actions, regardless of whether they were operating with all their faculties. But courts will, on occasion, allow a defendant to present evidence of intoxication in order to disprove the mental state ("mens rea")required for an alleged offense.
General and Specific Intent
- States like California take the approach that defendants may use voluntary intoxication to argue that they didn't form the specific intent necessary to commit a particular crime. But it's a question of fact—someone can be drunk, but nevertheless capable of forming specific intent. Regardless, most crimes don't require specific intent, just general intent. And voluntary intoxication isn't a de…
Partial Defense
- Even where voluntary intoxication is a potential defense to specific intent crimes, it often reduces the defendant's culpability, rather than let him or her off the hook. For example, assume one person, extremely inebriated, attacks another. Drunkenness might have prevented the attacker from forming the specific intent necessary to commit assault w...
Lots of Restrictions
- Some states take a particularly restrictive approach to defenses based on voluntary intoxication. In Alabama, for example, voluntary intoxication can disprove the mental state required for a specific intent offense only if it amounts to insanity. The intoxication must make the requisite mental state "impossible"—it must be so severe that the defendant is "incapable of consciousne…
Get Help
- If you've been accused of a crime you allegedly committed while intoxicated, consult an experienced criminal defense attorney. There are wrinkles in the law on intoxication, and they can vary from state to state. A knowledgeable lawyer can fully advise you of the applicable law and protect your rights.
Introduction
- This Legal Guidance is intended to assist prosecutors when dealing with issues of intoxication relating to suspects/defendants.
General Principle
- Intoxication, whether voluntary or involuntary, is not a defence per se. However, where a person is intoxicated through drink or drugs and commits a crime, the level of intoxication may be such as to prevent that person from forming the necessary mens reaof the crime.
Intoxication: Involuntary Versus Voluntary
- Involuntary Intoxication
Involuntary intoxication most commonly arises in cases where the suspect/defendant claims that their food or drink has been ‘spiked’ without their knowledge. However, involuntary intoxication is not a defence when the defendant (despite or because of the intoxication) formed the necessar… - Voluntary Intoxication
Voluntary intoxication occurs as a result of the voluntary consumption of alcohol or drugs provided that, in the case of a drug, it is well known for being liable to cause unpredictability or aggressiveness. In R v Bailey [1983] 2 All ER 503 and R v Hardie[1985] 3 All ER 848, the Court of …
Intoxication: Specific and Basic Intent
- Voluntary intoxication is never a defence to a crime of basic intent. However, where the defendant has voluntarily put himself in the position of being intoxicated to the extent that he is incapable of forming the mental element of the offence, this will amount to a defence in respect of a crime of specific intent. This principle is subject to the caveat that a drunken intent is still an intent: R v S…
Mistake
- Drunken mistakes are generally no defence to crimes of basic intent: R v Fotheringham (1989) 88 Cr App R 206. However, where a statute (e.g. Section 5(2)(a) Criminal Damage Act 1971) provides a limited defence based on a genuine belief, the mistake may be relied on even where the mistake was induced by voluntary intoxication: Jaggard v Dickinson[1981] 1 QB 527.
Self-Defence
- Where a defendant is labouring under a mistaken belief that they are under attack and acting in self-defence, they cannot rely on such mistaken belief where it was induced by voluntary intoxication. This applies to crimes of both basic intent and specific intent: R v Hatton [2006] 1 Cr App R 16.
Automatism
- Disinhibition as a result of consuming drink and/or drugs is not automatism. Furthermore, automatism is not available to a defendant who has induced an acute state of involuntary behaviour as a result of his own voluntary consumption of intoxicants: R v Coley; R v McGhee; R v Harris [2013] Crim. L.R. 923 CA. In Scotland, the High Court of Justiciary has held that automatis…