Defendant threatened each of them with a knife before Ms. Williams was able to disarm him. In order to appease defendant and get her purse back, Ms. Dover agreed to walk with defendant to his home. Ms. Dover sustained serious injuries as a result. The evidence at trial also tended to show that defendant had been drinking heavily prior to this incident, and the issue of defendant's capacity to form an intent due to intoxication was submitted to the jury. The jury returned a verdict of guilty as to both the assault and robbery charges.
Defendant now appeals.
Defendant first contends that the trial court should not have submitted the assault and robbery charges to the jury because his intoxication negated the specific intent elements required for each charge. In essence, defendant is arguing that he was so intoxicated that, as a matter of law, he could not have formed the specific intent to commit either assault or robbery. Such an argument is without merit. Voluntary intoxication in and of itself is not a legal defense. It is only a viable defense if the degree of intoxication is such that a defendant could not form the specific intent required for the underlying offense.