Skip to main content

Davidson v. State

Citations

  • 849 N.E.2d 591
  • 2006 Ind. LEXIS 548
  • 2006 WL 1756041

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that evidence of involuntary intoxication does not require instruction including voluntariness as element of crime, although evidence supported an involuntary intoxication defense
  • concluding that defendant was not entitled to voluntariness instruction because his conduct was covered under statutes governing defense of intoxication, not voluntariness, but suggesting that voluntariness is not an element
  • noting that Indiana Pattern Jury Instructions insert the phrase “and voluntarily” into the elements of a crime when the evidence raises a voluntariness issue
  • noting that Indiana Pattern Jury Instructions insert the phrase \and voluntarily\ into the elements of a crime when the evidence raises a voluntariness issue
  • noting that Indiana Pattern Jury Instructions insert the phrase “and voluntarily” into the elements of a crime when the evidence raises a voluntariness issue
  • “Conflating these two concepts would lead inexorably to a result in apparent conflict with legislative policy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boehm, Dickson, Rucker, Shepard, Sullivan

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.