Yoshizuka Keith I, Perry Paul J
Behavioral and Administrative Sciences Department, Touro University-California, College of Pharmacy, Vallejo (Mare Island), CA 94592, USA.
J Pharm Pract. 2012 Feb;25(1):50-60. doi: 10.1177/0897190011431147. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
Two criminal cases are presented in which the counsel for the defendants requested an expert witness to opine whether their drug-intoxicated clients were capable of forming the specific intent necessary to commit the felonies for which they were charged. Intent from a legal standpoint is often times a poorly understood concept among expert witnesses. The application of a criminal defense of intoxication depends upon the nature of the crime the defendant is accused. The intoxication defense cannot be applied to general intent crimes. In cases where specific intent crimes are charged against the defendant, voluntary intoxication may be used to prove that the defendant could not possess the capacity to formulate the intent as a necessary element of the crime. Voluntary intoxication may be used as a defense in specific intent crimes to negate the critical element of intent required for the prosecution to prove in criminal cases. Without being able to prove intent, the prosecution has not met their burden of proving that every element of the crime has been met, thus resulting in an acquittal.
这里呈现了两个刑事案件,其中被告的律师请专家证人就其吸毒致醉的客户是否有能力形成实施他们被指控重罪所需的特定意图发表意见。从法律角度来看,意图这个概念在专家证人中常常是一个理解不深的概念。醉酒作为刑事辩护的适用取决于被告被指控的罪行的性质。醉酒辩护不适用于一般意图犯罪。在被告被指控特定意图犯罪的案件中,自愿醉酒可用于证明被告没有能力形成作为犯罪必要要素的意图。在特定意图犯罪中,自愿醉酒可作为一种辩护手段,以否定检方在刑事案件中必须证明的关键意图要素。如果无法证明意图,检方就没有履行其证明犯罪的每个要素都已满足的举证责任,从而导致无罪判决。