MD CJI&C § 8.19. Voluntary Intoxication

MD CJI&C § 8.19. Voluntary Intoxication

State: Maryland

2 MD Criminal Jury Instructions and Commentary § 8.19
Maryland Criminal Jury Instructions and Commentary, Third Edition
Chapter 8 DEFENSES
N. Voluntary Intoxication

CJI&C § 8.19. Voluntary Intoxication

You have heard evidence that (insert name of defendant) may have acted while intoxicated by [alcohol] [drugs]. Generally, voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a criminal charge. An exception occurs when a person is charged with certain crimes that allow for the defense of voluntary intoxication.

The defendant has been charged with (insert crime charged requiring specific intent), which is a crime that allows for a defense of voluntary intoxication. Therefore, the State must prove that the defendant acted with intent to commit (insert crime charged requiring specific intent). [Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to (insert offense(s) charged that do not require specific intent).]

If (insert name of defendant) was so intoxicated that [he] [she] was unable to formulate the intent required to commit (insert crime charged requiring specific intent), then an essential element of the crime has not been established. The fact that (insert name of defendant) may have been intoxicated at the time of the commission of the alleged offense may be considered by you as bearing upon this intent.

The issue in this case is not whether the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the commission of the alleged crime; it is whether [he] [she] was so intoxicated at the time the act was committed that [he] [she] [lacked capacity] [was not sober enough] to form the intent to (insert crime charged requiring specific intent), a necessary element of the offense charged.

A person can be intoxicated and still be able to form the required intent. For voluntary intoxication to be a defense, the defendant must have lost control of [his] [her] mental faculties to such an extent that [he] [she] was unable to form the intent to (insert crime requiring specific intent).

[The defendant may not claim voluntary intoxication as a defense if [he] [she] formed the intent to commit the offense charged before [he] [she] was intoxicated, and then, after forming the intent to commit the offense, became intoxicated before actually committing the offense.]

If, after a full and fair consideration of all of the facts and circumstances in evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to whether (insert name of defendant) [had the capacity] [was sober enough] to form the intent to commit (insert crime requiring specific intent), you must find (insert name of defendant) not guilty. On the other hand, if the State has convinced you beyond a reasonable doubt that (insert name of defendant) [did have the capacity] [was sober enough] to intend to commit (insert crime charged requiring specific intent), then you [should] [must] conclude that voluntary intoxication does not excuse (insert name of defendant) of criminal responsibility.

By | 2018-04-06T07:25:29+00:00 April 6th, 2018|Comments Off on MD CJI&C § 8.19. Voluntary Intoxication