Lots of people seem to think a defendant in a criminal case can be set free because of being drunk or high on drugs when he or she committed a crime.
The usual argument is that the defendant’s mental functioning was so out of whack that they cannot be considered respondible for what they did.
Generally, however, voluntary intoxication does not excuse criminal conduct. People are quite aware the impact alcohol or drugs have on their their mental functioning, and so they should be held legally responsible if they commit crimes as a result of their voluntary use.
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 that intent.
Normally this is considered will only take you part way because defendant’s actions are only partially excused. As a result the defendant will often 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 DUI 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
