NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED FEDERAL LAWYERS

29 Sep 23

How to Use Intoxication as a Defense to Violent Crimes in Chicago

| by

Last Updated on: 1st October 2023, 10:08 am

 

How to Use Intoxication as a Defense to Violent Crimes in Chicago

Being drunk or high can sometimes be a defense to criminal charges in Illinois. But it’s not as simple as just saying “I was wasted, I didn’t know what I was doing.” There are specific requirements that your attorney will need to prove in order for intoxication to be a valid defense in your case.

First off, you can’t use intoxication as a defense for every crime. In Illinois, it’s only allowed for specific intent crimes – things like murder, assault, battery, etc. where the prosecution has to prove you intended to commit the crime. For general intent crimes like DUI or reckless conduct, being drunk or high is not a defense.

Voluntary vs Involuntary Intoxication

There’s also a difference between voluntary and involuntary intoxication. Voluntary means you got drunk or high by choice – you willingly drank alcohol or took drugs. Involuntary means someone slipped you something without your knowledge or consent.

Involuntary intoxication is a stronger defense. It’s easier to argue you shouldn’t be held responsible for actions you took while unknowingly intoxicated. But voluntary intoxication can also be used as long as you meet the other requirements.

Level of Intoxication

You can’t just claim “I was drunk” or “I was high.” Your attorney will need to prove a high level of intoxication – that you were so impaired you couldn’t form the intent to commit the crime.

For example, expert testimony may be used to show your blood alcohol content was over 0.15. Or witnesses could testify about your behavior and apparent level of impairment. The evidence needs to demonstrate you were in a state of “gross intoxication” rather than just buzzed or tipsy.

Timing of Intoxication

It’s not enough to simply be drunk or high at the time of the crime. Your attorney must prove the intoxication caused you to lack the mental state required to form criminal intent.

So evidence and testimony will aim to show:

  • When and how you became intoxicated
  • Your behavior and mental state leading up to the crime
  • Your inability to intend or understand the consequences of your actions

If there’s evidence you planned the crime ahead of time, or took steps to cover it up afterwards, then intoxication is less likely to be a strong defense.

LEARN MORE  Building Your Defense Against Kidnapping Charges in Chicago

Burden of Proof

Remember – intoxication is an affirmative defense, meaning you have the burden of proving it, not the prosecution. So your attorney will need to present solid evidence and convincing testimony to show:

  • You were involuntarily intoxicated, or reached an extremely high level of voluntary intoxication
  • The intoxication directly prevented you from forming criminal intent
  • You were unable to appreciate the criminality of your conduct or conform it to the law

If you can meet this difficult burden, then the charges may be reduced or dismissed altogether. But intoxication defenses also carry risks, as they require admitting to drug and alcohol use. So make sure to discuss all options thoroughly with your attorney.

Limits of the Intoxication Defense

Even if successful, an intoxication defense has limits. It can only reduce charges requiring specific intent to lesser charges involving general intent or recklessness. You generally can’t escape liability completely just because you were too impaired to control your actions.

For example, an intoxication defense to murder charges may result in a conviction for involuntary manslaughter instead. An assault charge could be reduced to reckless conduct. So while intoxication may limit the severity of the charges, you’ll still likely face consequences.

Public Intoxication

Separate from using it as a defense, you should know that public intoxication is illegal in Chicago. Police can arrest you for being drunk or high in public places like streets, parks, restaurants, etc. Some key points on public intoxication laws:

  • There is no BAC limit – officers can make subjective determinations of impairment based on speech, balance, behavior, etc.
  • Drug intoxication is treated the same as alcohol
  • You don’t have to be disruptive or disorderly – just impaired in public
  • Penalties are minor – up to a $500 fine and no jail time for first offense

So while being drunk or high alone isn’t a crime, doing so publicly can result in misdemeanor charges. It’s best to avoid getting intoxicated outside of private spaces like homes.

Other Defenses

If intoxication isn’t an option, there are other defenses that may apply depending on the specifics of your case:

  • Self-Defense – You acted to protect yourself or others from harm
  • Duress – You were forced to act by threats of immediate bodily harm
  • Insanity – You were unable to appreciate the criminality of your conduct due to mental defect
  • Mistake of fact – You had a reasonable mistaken belief negating your criminal intent
LEARN MORE  What to Do if You're Charged with Drug Possession in Chicago

An experienced criminal defense attorney will evaluate all potential defenses and build the strongest case possible for you. Don’t hesitate to explore your options.

Conclusion

While intoxication can sometimes provide a defense to violent crimes requiring specific intent, it is subject to strict requirements. Evidence must demonstrate an extremely high level of impairment that directly prevented you from forming criminal intent. Even then, charges may only be reduced rather than dismissed. Given the challenges, it’s critical to have an assertive attorney argue your side of the story. With sound legal advice and advocacy, justice may still be secured.

 

Sources:

Is Intoxication a Valid Defense to a Crime in Illinois?

THE INTOXICATION DEFENSE IN ILLINOIS

Intoxication as Defense in Chicago Criminal Case

What Is Public Intoxication In Chicago?

Is Public Intoxication a Crime in Illinois?

Illinois’ Latest Version of the Defense of Voluntary Intoxication: Is It Wise? Is It Constitutional?