Useof Voluntary Intoxication as a Defense
Intoxicationis defined as a psychological or bodily disruption that results fromindulging in alcohol or other drugs that affect the normalfunctioning of the brain (Ayoob etal.,2014).The utilization of voluntary intoxication as a defense wouldjustify the unlawful actions which result from the voluntary act ofabusing liquor and other drugs. This is often not considered as avalid argument because the fact that the defendant willingly indulgedin alcohol or used other drugs means that there cannot be anyjustification for whatever unlawful actions they committed. However,the defense may be considered if there was no intention of committingthe offense due to drinking alcohol or using other drugs. Forinstance, while on a date, rape was committed by an inebriated personwho had consumed Viagra as a result of too much drinking. The Viagracaused the person to sexually violate another person. The alcohol wasdrunk willingly, but the rape was not committed willingly. The personwould not have sexually violated the other person had they notconsumed Viagra. If the action is not a character of the individualin question, the person may not face any criminal charges. Though thevoluntary intoxication defense is rarely successful, it is stillutilized to minimize a criminal act with the judges (Ayoob etal.,2014).
Useof Deadly Force in Self-Defense
Deadlyforce is defined as an act of creating serious physical injury oreven killing another person (Ayoob etal.,2014). For a defendant to prove the use of deadly force as a way ofdefense, he or she must first prove that they tried to withdraw fromthe fight before they resulted in the use of deadly force. The lawstates that, if the defendant has a chance to pull out from violence,then they should pull out. Nonetheless, there are exceptions to thelaw. First, if the defendant did not get an opportunity to withdraw,then they can use deadly force to defend themselves. Secondly, if thedefendant is attacked at their residents, then they do not need towithdraw from the fight. For instance, a case of Beverly v. Mannaillustrates this scenario. The plaintiff Beverly accused Manna ofshooting him in the leg. The shooting happened at the defendantresident as a result of theft accusation. The court ruled in favor ofthe defendant stating that the defendant acted forcefully, as a wayof self-defense since the plaintiff confronted him in his residents(Ayoob etal.,2014).
Ayoob,M., Hauser, D., Nelsen, T., & In Peterson, C. (2014). Deadlyforce: Understanding your right to self-defense.