Court Opinion

ID: 9731197
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 15:37:52.809187+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:15.355156
License: Public Domain

DeBRULER, Justice,
dissenting.
According to testimony at trial appellant drank considerable amounts of alcohol during the several hours preceding the alleged rape of the prosecutrix and after the alleged rape, passed out. While the jury was not required to credit any of this proof, it was such that it was susceptible of belief, and if believed could have created a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury that a high probability existed that appellant was aware of what he was doing when he transgressed that line between permissible touching and illegal force. Williams v. State (1980) Ind., 402 N.E.2d 954. In my opinion, there was sufficient evidence of intoxication presented to entitle appellant to the instruction on the defense of intoxication, that it was error to refuse that instruction, and that this conviction should be reversed and remanded for a new trial.