Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Voluntary intoxication and criminal responsibility.

D B Marlowe1, J B Lambert, R G Thompson

  • 1Treatment Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, One Commerce Square, 2005 Market Street, Suite 1120, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-7220, USA. MARLOWE@TResearch.com

Behavioral Sciences & the Law
|July 9, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Patulin Production by Species of Aspergillus and Penicillium at 1.7, 7.2, and 12.8 C.

Journal of food protection·2019
Same author

Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from immature embryos of western larch.

Plant cell reports·2013
Same author

Through-space interactions of double bonds by photoelectron spectroscopy.

Journal of the American Chemical Society·2012
Same author

The triphenylsilyl cation.

Journal of the American Chemical Society·2011
Same author

Peer reviewed: x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and archaeology.

Analytical chemistry·2011
Same author

Music enhances category fluency in healthy older adults and Alzheimer's disease patients.

Experimental aging research·2005
Same journal

A Narrative Review on Juvenile Offense and the Impact and Implications of Internalizing Disorders.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
Same journal

Behavioral and Cognitive Equivalence Threshold: Foundations for the Practical Extension of Atkins and Roper.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
Same journal

The Adverse Childhood Experiences Paradigm and Forensic/Correctional Populations: A Scoping Review.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
Same journal

Front-End Governance of Juvenile Cybercrime in China: Platform Accountability, Risk Mitigation, and Tri-Partite Collaboration.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
Same journal

Mitigating, Aggravating, or Both? A Review of Context-Dependent Factors in Sentencing Decisions.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
Same journal

"Evil is Real and Attitude is Everything": Applying Shattered Assumptions Theory to Worldview Changes Following Wrongful Conviction.

Behavioral sciences & the law·2026
See all related articles

This review examines US law on voluntary intoxication and criminal responsibility, detailing how intoxication evidence is used to negate mens rea, support insanity defenses, and influence sentencing across all US jurisdictions.

Area of Science:

  • Law and Psychology
  • Forensic Science

Background:

  • Voluntary intoxication is a complex factor in criminal responsibility.
  • Varying legal standards exist across the United States regarding its admissibility in court.
  • Understanding these legal nuances is crucial for both legal and mental health professionals.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To comprehensively review the legal landscape of voluntary intoxication and criminal responsibility in all US jurisdictions.
  • To analyze how intoxication evidence is utilized to affect mens rea, insanity defenses, and sentencing.
  • To connect judicial considerations of this evidence with clinically relevant criteria.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of statutory and case law across the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of legal precedents governing the admissibility and impact of intoxication evidence.
  • Comparison of legal factors with established clinical criteria relevant to mental state.

    • Main Results:

    • Intoxication evidence is inconsistently applied across jurisdictions for negating mens rea (diminished capacity), supporting insanity pleas, and mitigating sentences.
    • Courts consider specific factors when admitting intoxication evidence, which have links to clinical assessments.
    • Significant jurisdictional differences exist in how the law treats voluntary intoxication's role in criminal culpability.

    Conclusions:

    • The legal treatment of voluntary intoxication in criminal responsibility remains complex and jurisdiction-dependent.
    • There is a need for greater consistency and clarity in applying legal standards related to intoxication.
    • Bridging legal and clinical perspectives can enhance the equitable application of law in cases involving intoxication.