Court Opinion

ID: 9713539
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:17:06.384645+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:19.150135
License: Public Domain

DeBRULER, Justice,
dissenting.
The trial court refused an instruction requested by the defendant explaining the defense of voluntary intoxication. I know of no practical or legal reason to declare that such an instruction would not be proper in a case in which the defendant has also plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
A voluntary intoxication instruction should be given if evidence is presented which, if believed, is such that it could create a reasonable doubt in the mind of a rational trier of fact that the accused entertained the requisite specific intent. If .05 percent blood alcohol is enough to arrest for driving under the influence, and if .10 percent is legally intoxicated, then it seems only consistent that .2166 percent should entitle a criminal defendant to an instruction that the jury may consider his intoxication in determining specific intent.