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 Ohio, voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to criminal charges. Ohio law recognizes that voluntary consumption of drugs or alcohol does not excuse criminal conduct. However, if the intoxication is involuntary, such as when a person is unknowingly drugged, it may serve as a defense if it can be shown that the defendant lacked the capacity to understand the wrongfulness of their actions or to form the necessary criminal intent. For specific intent crimes, like attempted murder, a defendant may argue that due to voluntary intoxication, they were incapable of forming the specific intent required for the offense. This is a complex area of law, and whether intoxication can be used as a defense is ultimately a question of fact for the jury to decide based on the evidence presented at trial. The relevant statutes and case law would provide the specific legal framework for these defenses in Ohio.
