Skip to main content

State v. Thomas

Citations

  • 98 P.3d 1258

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining legal distinctions between affirmative defenses of diminished capacity and voluntary intoxication
  • \Expert testimony is helpful if it concerns matters beyond the common knowledge of the average layperson.\(citing State v. Farr-Lenzini, 93 Wn. App. 453, 461,970P.2d313 (1999))
  • jurors can draw reasonable inferences from testimony about alcohol use
  • “Assault in the first degree includes specific intent as an element.”
  • trial court properly excluded expert testimony that defendant had experienced an alcoholic blackout leaving her with no recollection of an assault because the blackout is not evidence that she could not form the intent to commit assault in the first degree

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schindler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 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.