FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 11 - CHAPTER 256
Go to Volume 11 Table of Contents  -  Go to Chapter 256 Table of Contents

256.6 Intoxication, Voluntary

    256.6.3 Voluntary Intoxication: Experts

    256.6.3.1 Experts: General Principles
    256.6.3.2 Voluntary Intoxication: Expert Testimony Regarding Defendant's Formation Of Mental State
    256.6.3.3 Expert Testimony As To Combined Effects Of Alcohol And Cocaine
    256.6.3.4 Expert Testimony Required For Drug Intoxication

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 11 - CHAPTER 256

    See FORECITE National™ Chapter 29 [Expert Opinion Testimony].

    See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.5.8 [Expert Testimony/Scientific Evidence]

See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.9.11 [Intoxication And Criminal Liability].

See generally FORECITE National™ 256.6.2.9 [Duty To Instruct On Lesser Included Offense Based On Intoxication].

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 11 - CHAPTER 256

    See FORECITE National™ 256.7.1.5 [Expert Testimony Regarding Defendant's Formation Of Mental State].

    See also FORECITE National™ 29.1.9 [Expert Testimony: Improper Prosecutorial Comment On Failure Of Expert To Testify Regarding Whether Defendant Did Or Did Not Have Required Mental State As Misconduct].

    See also FORECITE National™ 253.4.10.6 [Self Defense: Expert Testimony Regarding Defendant’s Mental Retardation].

    See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.5.8 [Expert Testimony/Scientific Evidence].

See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.9.11 [Intoxication And Criminal Liability].

See generally FORECITE National™ 256.6.2.9 [Duty To Instruct On Lesser Included Offense Based On Intoxication].

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 11 - CHAPTER 256

    256.6.3.3    Expert Testimony As To Combined Effects Of Alcohol And Cocaine

PRACTICE NOTE: In People v. Coyle (CA 1994) 22 CA4th 1679, 1684-85 [28 CR2d 488], the court held that a forensic expert on alcohol and cocaine use may offer an opinion as to combined effects of the two substances despite the absence of clinical studies on that issue.

    See also FORECITE National™ 256.7.2.2 [Mental Disease Or Defect: When Combined With Intoxication].

    See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.5.8 [Expert Testimony/Scientific Evidence].

See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.9.11 [Intoxication And Criminal Liability].

See generally FORECITE National™ 256.6.2.9 [Duty To Instruct On Lesser Included Offense Based On Intoxication].

FORECITE National™
Instructions And Issues Omitted By The Pattern Instructions
Copyright & Publication Information

 VOLUME 11 - CHAPTER 256

PRACTICE NOTE: The courts have recognized a distinction between alcohol and drug intoxication. While the former is within the ken of the average juror the latter is not. (See e.g., People v. Cox (CA 1990) 221 CA3d 980, 989 [270 CR 730].) Therefore, where there is no specific evidence as to the effect of the drug upon the defendant's mental processes the court may not be obligated to instruct upon intoxication. (Ibid.)

    Hence, to obtain instruction upon this defense, counsel should present expert testimony or other evidence -- such as the defendant's testimony -- as to the effect of the drug in cases involving drug intoxication. (See also People v. Ivans (CA 1992) 2 CA4th 1654, 1661-62 [4 CR2d 66]; Gurganus v. State (FL 1984) 451 So2d 817, 823 [error to exclude psychologist's testimony that defendant would have lessened capability for making rational choices and directing his behavior after ingestion of Fiorinal and alcohol, that he would not be in effective control of his behavior and would have had mental defect causing him to lose his ability to understand or reason accurately and form specific intent]; People v. Free (IL 1983) 447 NE2d 218, 233 [testimony of a psychologist and psychopharmacologist on the question of the defendant's ability to act intentionally while under the influence of alcohol and PCP related to defense of voluntary intoxication and was admissible on issue whether defendant had ability to act intentionally at time of crime].)

    See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.5.8 [Expert Testimony/Scientific Evidence].

See also generally, FORECITE National™ 305.9.11 [Intoxication And Criminal Liability].

See generally FORECITE National™ 256.6.2.9 [Duty To Instruct On Lesser Included Offense Based On Intoxication].