Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law > Intoxication Defence > Flashcards

Intoxication Defence Flashcards

1
Q

What are the 3 factors for intoxication to be considered as a defence

A
  1. The manner in which D became intoxicated
  2. The level of intoxication
  3. The type of offence committed whilst intoxicated
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is a specific intent offence

A

Offences which require specific intention for MR (eg murder, theft)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is a basic intent offence

A

Offences for which recklessness is sufficient for MR (eg assault and battery)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What type of offence can voluntary intoxication negate

A

Specific intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What case shows that voluntary intoxication can negate the MR for specific intent offences

A

DPP v Beard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What did Lord Birkenhead state in DPP v Beard for voluntary intoxication

A

‘If he was so drunk that he was incapable of forming the intent required’, he could use intoxication as a defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the case example for D being so drunk (voluntary) that he could not form MR

A

Sheenan and Moore

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the case example of D having the MR despite being voluntarily intoxicated

A

Gallagher

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Why does being voluntarily intoxicated NOT negate the MR for basic intent offences

A

Becoming intoxicated is considered reckless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the case example for voluntary intoxication NOT negating MR for a basic intent offence

A

Majewski

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is the test for involuntary intoxication

A

Did D have the required MR when he committed the offence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is are 2 case examples for D having the MR despite being involuntarily intoxicated due to being spiked

A

Kingston
Allen

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the case example of being involuntarily intoxicated due to prescription drugs

A

Bailey

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the case example for D having an unexpected reaction to sleeping (soporific) drugs

A

Hardie

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What country says that taking an intoxicating substance under duress is involuntary

A

USA

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case shows that the trial judge is not obligated to direct the jury about the possibility of intoxication unless D raises it himself

A

Groark

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What case shows that D cannot use ‘intoxicated mistake’ for basic intent offences

A

Lipman

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What case shows that there is no defence for D making a mistake as to the need for self-defence due to intoxication

A

O’Grady

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What type of crimes use intoxication as a defence (Intro)

A

Fault-based crimes (crimes that require MR)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What does legal principle say about intoxication defence (Intro)

A

A D without MR should not be criminally responsible

21
Q

What does Professor Ashworth state about intoxicated criminals in terms of public policy (Intro)

A

They should not have an ‘easy route to impunity’

22
Q

Who is the burden of proof on to disprove the intoxication (Intro)

A

The burden of proof is on the prosecution

23
Q

What does it mean if D is voluntarily intoxicated (AO1)

A

D chose to take the intoxicating substance

24
Q

Why can voluntary intoxication not work for basic intent crimes (AO1)

A

Being voluntarily intoxicated is reckless

25
Q

What did ‘Lord Birkenhead’ state (AO1)

A

‘If D was so drunk he was incapable of forming the intent required, he could not be convicted of a crime’

26
Q

What was stated in ‘Gallagher’ (AO1)

A

Drunk intent is still intent

27
Q

What does it mean to be involuntarily intoxicated (AO1)

A

D did not choose to take the intoxicating substance

28
Q

What type of crimes does the intoxication defence negate the MR on (AO1)

A

Both specific intent and basic intent crimes

29
Q

What is the test for involuntary intoxication (AO1)

A

Did D have the required MR when he committed the offence

30
Q

What are the 4 ways D can be involuntarily intoxicated with the case(s) for each (AO1)

A
  1. D was spiked (Kingston, Allen)
  2. D took prescription drugs (Bailey)
  3. D had an unexpected reaction to soporfic drugs (Hardie)
  4. D took the intoxicating substance under duress (USA precedent)
31
Q

What are the 4 points for Intoxication evaluation (AO3)

A
  1. Rules do not work for all offences
  2. Level of intoxication
  3. Leniency for involuntary intoxication
  4. Decision in Kingston
32
Q

What is the evidence for the rules not working for all offences (AO3)

A

Defence is allowed for murder but not manslaughter

33
Q

What is the explanation for the rules not working for all offences (AO3)

A

Murder is downgraded to manslaughter

34
Q

What is the link back to the question for the rules not working for all offences (AO3)

A

Does balance the law to some extent as manslaughter is still punished, but some criminals can use this as an escape route

35
Q

What are the 2 examples of evidence for level of intoxication (AO3)

A

DPP v Beard looks at whether D was ‘so intoxicated that they could not form the MR’
AND
Gallagher states a drunken mistake is still an intent

36
Q

What is the explanation for level of intoxication (AO3)

A

Janet Loveless says ‘if D is so intoxicated they cannot form specific intent – then they can’t form recklessness either!’

37
Q

What is the link back to the question for level of intoxication (AO3)

A

Balances the law to a large extent as people who are intoxicated should be held accountable for actions unless completely unable to form intent.

38
Q

What is the evidence for leniency for involuntary intoxication (AO3)

A

D is seen as a victim themselves as they may have been spiked or had unwanted effects from prescription

39
Q

What is the explanation for leniency for involuntary intoxication (AO3)

A

BUT​ decision in Hardie was criticised by Law Commission – taking another’s medication is reckless​

​

40
Q

What is the link back to the question for leniency for involuntary intoxication (AO3)

A

Does NOT balance to some extent as Hardie’s actions were still reckless yet he was able to use the defence – leniency allows some offenders ‘off the hook’ ​

41
Q

What is the evidence for the decision in Kingston (AO3)

A

Even though Kingston was a ‘victim’ himself as he was ‘spiked’, he still had MR​

42
Q

What is the explanation for the decision in Kingston (AO3)

A

Professor Clarkson argues that he should have been able to use the defence as he was a ‘victim’. The HOL disagreed on public policy grounds​

43
Q

What is the link back to the question for the decision in Kingston (AO3)

A

Does strike a balance as the nature of the crime was severe and D did to some extent form the MR

44
Q

What are 2 potential reform’s for the intoxication defence

A

1) Ensure all specific intent crimes have a corresponding basic intent crime​
2) Some argue it should be a full defence for all offences where the defendant is incapable of forming any men’s rea​

45
Q

What did the Butler Committee suggest as a reform

A

The Butler Committee suggested creating a new offence of ‘dangerous intoxication’ with a sentence of 1 year imprisonment for the first offence, rising to 3 years for further offences​

46
Q

What is the name of the report the Law Commission made as a reform for Intoxication

A

‘Intoxication and Criminal Liability’ 2009 Report

47
Q

What did the Law Commission suggest as a reform in the ‘Intoxication and Criminal Liability’ 2009 Report

A

1) abolish the specific/basic intent distinction, but keep the voluntary/involuntary distinction​
2) when intoxication is raised, it will be presumed to be voluntary intoxication unless the defence can prove they were involuntarily intoxicated on the balance of probabilities

48
Q

What is the conclusion of the evaluation for Intoxication

A

Generally, the defence of intoxication does strike a fair balance between legal principle and public policy​

This is due to the fact that most of the law in this area is common law so it can be altered to suit changing social attitudes.​

Law (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions