intoxication Flashcards
what are the requirements
Was the Crime Committed one of Basic Intent or Specific Intent?
Was the Defendant Intoxicated Voluntarily or Involuntarily?
what are the basic intent crimes
Assault
Battery
ABH
GBH/Wounding s.20
Unlawful Act Manslaughter
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
specific intent crimes
GBH/Wounding s.18
Murder
Theft
Robbery
Burglary (s.9(1)(a))
Attempted Offences
what is voluntary intoxication
D has chosen to take an intoxicating substance. This can be by taking alcohol, illegal drugs or other intoxicants such as through sniffing glue. It can also occur where D knows that the effect of a prescribed drug will be to make him intoxicated
what is involuntary intoxication
D did not know he was taking an intoxicating substance. This may be where, for example, a soft drink has been ‘laced’ with alcohol or drugs. It also covers situations where prescribed drugs have the unexpected effect of making D intoxicated
can the defense be used for voluntary intoxication for specific intent crimes (3)
Yes if it means no intention has been formed.
No if the intent is formed before intoxication.
No if intent is still formed whilst intoxicated.
can the defense be used for voluntary intoxication for a basic intent crime (3)
No – recklessness of getting drunk satisfies the mens rea.
Court should ask if D would have realised the risk if sober.
Unless it was past intoxication leading to dependency or long term impacts
can the defense be used for involuntary intoxication for a specific intent crime (2)
No if drunken intent is still present.
Yes if no intention has been formed.
can the defense be used for an involuntary intoxication for a basic intent crime (1)
Yes as there is no reckless behavior present
specific intent crime and voluntary intoxication- Yes if it means no intention has been formed case
DPP v Beard
specific intent crime and voluntary intoxication- No if the intent is formed before the intoxication case
Gallagher
specific intent crime and voluntary intoxication- No if intent is formed whilst intoxicated case
Coley
voluntary intoxication with basic intent crime- No- recklessness of getting drunk satisfies the mens rea case
majweski
voluntary intoxication with basic intent crime- Court should ask if D would have realized the risk if sober
Richardson
voluntary intoxication with basic intent crime- Unless it was past intoxication leading to dependency or long term impacts case
harris
involuntary intoxication, specific intent crime- No if drunken intent is still present case
kingston
involuntary intoxication, specific intent crime- Yes if no intention has been formed case
hardie
involuntary intoxication, basic intent crime- Yes as there is no reckless behaviour present case
hardie
when can there be a mistake when intoxicated
If D is mistaken about a key fact because they are intoxicated, this can sometimes be taken into account by the jury
whats the case for this
R v Lipman
D took LSD and hallucinated, believing he was being attacked by snakes. The ‘snake’ was his girlfriend beside him in bed, who he killed by stuffing bedsheets down her throat. He was not guilty of murder (but guilty of manslaughter
