State v. Brooks

97 Wash.2d 873 (1982)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D went camping with a friend near the place where the victim's body was found on June 22nd. D began drinking beer, whiskey, and rum and continued to do so almost constantly from June 21 through the afternoon of the victim's death. Numerous witnesses described D's condition as follows: he was drunk; he was 'staggering around . . . drunk, a bottle of whiskey in [his] hands . . . through the biggest part of the day'; he was offered a grey spider which he ate and washed down with whiskey; his face was blotchy and his eyes were 'buggy red'; his speech was slurred; he was trembling; he walked lopsided; he was unsteady on his feet; he swayed back and forth; he stumbled; and he staggered and fell in the water. Dr. Lubach, a psychologist, offered to testify about D's ability to premeditate or deliberate. The excessive usage of alcohol, and the decrease in D's ability to control aggressive impulses when under the influence of alcohol, D would be very probable to act in an unpremeditated impulsive fashion under those conditions. The trial court permitted Dr. Lubach to testify that D had a personality disorder, was an alcoholic, and tended to act in an impulsive manner. He was not permitted to give his opinion on whether D was capable of premeditating an intent to kill. The trial court instructed the jury that to convict D of murder in the first degree it must find he acted 'with intent to cause the death' of the victim and that 'the intent to cause the death was premeditated.' The court refused to give D's proposed instruction bearing on voluntary intoxication asserting there was no evidence that the consumption of alcohol affected D's ability to form an intent or impaired his mental state. The court stated that premeditation involves the passage of time and is not a mental state. It held that voluntary intoxication has no bearing on premeditation. D was convicted and appealed. The appeals court affirmed. D appealed.