Virginia Involuntary Intoxication Criminal Defense Lawyers Attorney

Virginia Involuntary Intoxication Criminal Defense Lawyers Attorney

by

Atchuthan Sriskandarajah

Commonwealth of Virginia v. Samuel Richardson

Facts:

During the evening hours the Defendant arrived at a party of local college students. The Defendant remembers ingesting a drink at the party, and his next memory is awaking in the City Jail. He asserts that he awoke with a severe headache and nausea. Upon his release, the Defendant went to the Hospital where a urine screen was performed. Among the information gleaned from that test was the presence of benzodiazepines in his system. Defendant asserted that he unknowingly consumed a drink containing benzodiazepines, causing him to exhibit symptoms consistent with intoxication. He bases his defense on involuntary intoxication. Without conceding that the Defendant’s intoxication was involuntary, the Commonwealth argues that involuntary intoxication is not an independent defense but is, rather, simply a defense of temporary insanity. In a criminal prosecution against defendant, defendant filed a motion in limine.

Issue:

Whether Involuntary intoxication is a

criminal defense

separate and distinct from the temporary insanity defense?

Discussion:

This court held that involuntary intoxication is a criminal defense separate and distinct from the temporary insanity defense. In sustaining defendant’s motion in limine, the court held that, while the involuntary intoxication defense was very similar to the insanity defense, the involuntary intoxication defense was a separate affirmative defense from the insanity defense. Under the modern definition of involuntary intoxication, the only difference between the definition of this defense and the insanity defense was the cause of the condition. While, for insanity, the proof of a mental disease or defect was required, for involuntary intoxication, proof that the intoxication was involuntarily caused was required.

Judgment:

This Court concludes that the involuntary intoxication defense is a separate affirmative defense from the insanity defense. In turn, this Court sustains the motion in limine.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the

SRIS Law Group

. They represent the firm s unofficial views of the Justices opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

Atchuthan Sriskandarajah is a Virginia lawyer and owner of the SRIS Law Group. The SRIS Law Group has offices in Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York,

North Carolina

& California. The firm handles criminal/traffic defense, family law, immigration & bankruptcy cases.

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com