Involuntary intoxication

Involuntary intoxication

Introduction

Since time immemorial, the law has been considered to be the rubric, which governs our civilization as human beings. A majority understands the law as a system of rules that have been created either through social or governmental institutions that, in turn, also enforce them.

Case study 1

In the United States, individual states are allowed to come up with their laws, unique laws different from the legislative requirements. For instance, in the state of Minnesota, there is a law that states, no one is to be charged for public intoxication. This creates a loophole for avoiding other chargeable offenses, once publicly intoxicated (Myers, 2015). This taken into account, we have the case of Joe. Who was playing cards at his friend’s house while drinking soda? On one occasion, a friend of his slips a synthetic pill into his soda without his consent (Myers, 2015). This results in him consuming it unwittingly, sending him into a complete stupor. Not knowing what he is doing, he attacks his friends. In this case, if Joe is charged with assault, he stands viable for an involuntary intoxication defense.

Involuntary intoxication as a defense against crimes such as sexual assault, in most cases, rarely succeeds. But taking into account the laws of Minnesota and affirmative defense, Scott Murphy may be granted a lesser sentence or even be fined. However, Scott has to prove he was highly intoxicated on top of being involuntarily intoxicated. If this can be determined, then he is entitled to the defense of involuntary intoxication (Cluogh, 2019). With relation to the laws of the state, involuntary intoxication may excuse criminal conduct if it prevented organizationdefendant from understanding the course of their actions, or makes him or her incapable of obeying the law and lastly when it leaves the defendant in the unstable state of mind to stand for a conviction.

If none of the above conditions are met, then the defendant is to face full sentencing against the crimes committed, and not even a lesser sentence should be granted, as their actions will be on their account, and not under the entrapment of the intoxication (Vondruska, 2015). They are making this a voluntary act.

Case study 2

The office of the Revisor of Statutes in Minnesota states that if a defendant plans to use entrapment as part of their strategies in defense, they must inform the prosecutor before writing for the trap to be considered as part of the case (Allen,2018).

For instance, a man is charged with selling illegal drugs to an undercover agent, after several weeks of the officer stopping by his home and, persuading him to sell him drugs despite several refusals. In another case, if the officer begged the woman to provide him with the drugs and he gave in without hesitation, then the agent’s actions will not be considered entrapment (De Feo, 2013). The crime of trap is only considered when the defendant engaged in overbearing or extreme behavior.

Entrapment cases usually occur in situations where a police officer possesses as a minor and lures the defendant to meet for a sexual encounter when an undercover officer owns as a consumer of illegal drugs to purchase drugs from the suspect in question(Luttrell,2018). However, other than entrapment, there is also providing an individual with the opportunity to commit a crime, as seen in the latter case above.

About Jack Oberman’s case, this was an example of entrapment, the officer in question was very persuasive evident by him visiting Jack on four different occasions before he finally gave in, on the fifth attempt. And since there is no record of the defendant informing the prosecutor before carrying out the case, Jack is entitled to a defense of entrapment by the court.

Entrapment, on the other hand, can be assessed and approached in two dimensions; this is the subjective approach and the objective approach. Under the actual procedure, when the defendant presents evidence of entrapment, the court assesses the evidence to determine if the officers’ actions, would have induced an average citizen who abides by the law to commit a crime (Kreeger, 2018).

Under a subjective approach, entrapment cases are not likely to succeed, the reason being that here, when the defendant offers evidence of entrapment, the jurors will decide whether he or she was predisposed to making the crimes or not, regardless of the agent’s inducements(Kreeger,2018). Jack is most likely to be left off the hook if his case is approached objectively, but on a subjective approach, he will be found guilty. Since he had the drugs and, he sold them to the agent proves the allegations against him.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both cases need a more in-depth approach in their investigation as they are not open to the eye, as one might presume (De Feo, 2013). Being drunk or high does not buy one a ticket to the defense of criminal offenses, same as entrapment, but when both cases are approached differently, the defendants might check out guilty.

References

Allen, R. J., Luttrell, M., & Kreeger, A. (2018). Clarifying entrapment. International Commentary on Evidence, 1(2).

Clough, A. (2019). Finding the Balance: Intoxication and Consent. Liverpool Law Review, 40(1), 49-64.

DeFeo, M. A. (2013). Entrapment as a Defense to Criminal Responsibility: Its History, Theory, and Application. USFL, Rev., 1, 243.

Myers, W. C., & Vondruska, M. A. (2015). Murder, minors, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and the involuntary intoxication defense. The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 26(3), 487-496.