0
Many people assume a defendant in a criminal case may likely be set free because of being intoxicated or high on some kind of drugs when he or she committed he crime they are charged with.
Defendants who commit crimes under the influence of drugs or alcohol sometimes argue that their mental functioning was so screwed up that they cannot be considered respondible for what they did.
Generally, however, where the intoxication or impairment was voluntary their criminal behavior will not be excused. People are well aware the impact alcohol or drugs have on their their ability to think straight, and so they have no good excuse if they commit crimes as a result of their voluntary actions.
This general principle does not hold at all times and in all states. For instance where committing the crime required specific intent to bring about certain specific consequences If the defendant is accused of committing a crime that requires what’s known as “specific intent” (intending the precise consequences, as well as intending to do the physical act that leads up to the consequences), the defendant may claim that he was too drunk or high to have formed the specific intent.
Normally this is considered only a partial defense, however, because it doesn’t entirely excuse the defendant’s actions. As a result the defendant will usually be convicted of another crime that doesn’t require proof of a specific intent – for example, assault with a deadly weapon instead of assault with the intent to commit murder.
Steven Louth is a Boulder felony lawyer who exclusively practices Criminal Defense Law. If you need the help of an exceptionally experienced and dedicated attorney contact Steven Louth for a free case evaluation – 303-442-2297
Back to top