General principles - Intoxication

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary intoxication, identify when intoxication is a defense to criminal charges, and apply the rules to specific and general intent crimes. You will also recognize common exam traps and confidently answer MBE questions on intoxication.

MBE Syllabus

For the MBE, you are required to understand how intoxication affects criminal liability. This includes knowing when intoxication is a defense, the difference between voluntary and involuntary intoxication, and how these concepts interact with specific and general intent crimes. You should be able to:

  • Recognize the distinction between voluntary and involuntary intoxication.
  • Determine when intoxication negates mens rea for specific intent crimes.
  • Apply the rules to general intent and strict liability offenses.
  • Identify the limits of the intoxication defense and common exam pitfalls.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. Which type of crime is most likely to be negated by voluntary intoxication?
    1. Strict liability
    2. General intent
    3. Specific intent
    4. Malice
  2. Involuntary intoxication is a defense to:
    1. Only specific intent crimes
    2. Only strict liability crimes
    3. Both specific and general intent crimes if it negates mens rea
    4. No crimes
  3. Which of the following is NOT a recognized form of involuntary intoxication?
    1. Being drugged without knowledge
    2. Taking medication with an unexpected reaction
    3. Drinking alcohol voluntarily
    4. Being forced to consume an intoxicant

Introduction

Intoxication is a recurring issue in criminal law, especially on the MBE. Whether intoxication can serve as a defense depends on whether it was voluntary or involuntary, and on the type of crime charged. Understanding these distinctions is essential for answering MBE questions accurately.

Voluntary Intoxication

Voluntary intoxication occurs when a person knowingly consumes an intoxicant, such as alcohol or drugs, by their own choice.

Key Term: Voluntary Intoxication
The state of being intoxicated as a result of one's own voluntary act of consuming alcohol, drugs, or other substances.

Voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to most crimes. However, it may negate the mens rea for specific intent crimes if the intoxication is so severe that the defendant could not form the required intent.

Key Term: Specific Intent Crime
A crime that requires the defendant to have a particular purpose or objective beyond the act itself, such as larceny (intent to permanently deprive) or burglary (intent to commit a felony inside).

Voluntary intoxication is never a defense to general intent crimes, malice crimes (like common law murder or arson), or strict liability offenses.

Key Term: General Intent Crime
A crime that requires only the intent to perform the act, not a further specific purpose, such as battery or rape.

Key Term: Strict Liability Crime
A crime that does not require proof of any mens rea; the act alone is sufficient for liability.

Involuntary Intoxication

Involuntary intoxication arises when a person becomes intoxicated without their knowledge or against their will, or has an unexpected reaction to prescribed medication.

Key Term: Involuntary Intoxication
Intoxication that occurs without the person's voluntary action, such as being drugged unknowingly, forced to consume an intoxicant, or having an unanticipated reaction to medication.

Involuntary intoxication is treated similarly to insanity. It is a defense to both specific and general intent crimes if it prevents the defendant from forming the required mental state.

Application to Crime Types

  • Specific Intent Crimes: Voluntary intoxication may be a defense if it actually prevents formation of the specific intent. Involuntary intoxication is always a defense if it negates intent.
  • General Intent and Malice Crimes: Voluntary intoxication is not a defense. Involuntary intoxication may be a defense if it negates intent.
  • Strict Liability Crimes: Neither voluntary nor involuntary intoxication is a defense.

Worked Example 1.1

A defendant is charged with burglary after breaking into a store while extremely drunk. He claims he was so intoxicated he did not intend to steal anything. Is voluntary intoxication a defense?

Answer: Possibly. Burglary is a specific intent crime (intent to commit a felony inside). If the defendant was so intoxicated that he could not form the intent to commit a felony, voluntary intoxication may be a defense. However, mere drunkenness is not enough—the intoxication must be so severe that intent was truly absent.

Worked Example 1.2

A woman is charged with battery after assaulting someone while under the influence of a drug slipped into her drink without her knowledge. She claims she would not have acted that way if sober. Is involuntary intoxication a defense?

Answer: Yes. Involuntary intoxication is a defense to both specific and general intent crimes if it prevents the defendant from forming the required intent. Here, the woman did not voluntarily become intoxicated and may use this as a defense.

Exam Warning

Voluntary intoxication is never a defense to strict liability or general intent crimes. Do not be misled by answer choices suggesting otherwise.

Revision Tip

Always identify the type of crime and whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary before deciding if the defense applies.

Summary

Intoxication as a defense depends on whether it was voluntary or involuntary and the type of crime charged. Voluntary intoxication may only negate specific intent crimes, while involuntary intoxication can be a defense to any crime if it negates the required mental state. There is no intoxication defense to strict liability offenses.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • Voluntary intoxication may be a defense only to specific intent crimes if it negates intent.
  • Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to general intent, malice, or strict liability crimes.
  • Involuntary intoxication is a defense to both specific and general intent crimes if it negates mens rea.
  • Strict liability crimes do not allow any intoxication defense.
  • Always distinguish between voluntary and involuntary intoxication and identify the crime type.

Key Terms and Concepts

  • Voluntary Intoxication
  • Involuntary Intoxication
  • Specific Intent Crime
  • General Intent Crime
  • Strict Liability Crime
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
AdaptiBar
One-time Fee
$395
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
BarPrepHero
One-time Fee
$299
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Quimbee
One-time Fee
$1,199

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal