Intoxication due to a defendant’s voluntary consumption of drugs or alcohol isn’t usually a defense to criminal charges—but if the intoxication was involuntary, it may be a defense on the basis that the defendant did not understand what he was doing or that what he was doing was wrong. And some states allow a defendant to assert a defense that his voluntary intoxication prevented him from forming the specific intent to commit the crime (attempted murder, for example). But this is a question of fact that the jury will usually determine.

The availability and definition of any defense to criminal charges based on the defendant’s voluntary or involuntary intoxication is usually located in a state’s statutes—often in the penal or criminal code.

In Indiana, as in many states, voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to criminal charges. Indiana law holds that being voluntarily intoxicated does not excuse unlawful conduct. However, there are exceptions where voluntary intoxication may be considered by the court, particularly in cases where specific intent is an element of the crime. In such instances, if the defendant can demonstrate that their intoxication prevented them from forming the specific intent required for the offense, it may be used as a defense. This is often relevant in serious crimes such as attempted murder. On the other hand, involuntary intoxication can be a defense if the defendant can show that they were involuntarily drugged or otherwise did not consume the intoxicant knowingly, and as a result, could not understand the nature of their actions or that their actions were wrong. The determination of whether intoxication can be used as a defense, and under what circumstances, is typically a question of fact for the jury to decide based on the evidence presented at trial.