Actus Reus
A Voluntary Act State v. Utter Court of Appeals of Washington, 1971
Facts: Utter had been drinking heavily throughout the day. When his son came home Utter allegedly stabbed and killed him. Issue: Can the defendant’s drunken state be admitted as evidence that would shed light as to his voluntary capacity at the time of the murder? Can the defendant’s voluntarily induced unconscious state be considered evidence that would change the defendant’s ability to have a “will” at the time of the murder? Rule: When a state of unconsciousness is voluntarily induced through the use and consumption of alcohol or drugs, then that state of unconsciousness does not attain that stature of a complete defense. Thus, in a case such as the present one where there is evidence that he accused consumed alcohol, the trial court should give a cautionary instruction to the jury. Reasoning: the court said that if there was not enough evidence to establish that it might have been done involuntarily. The court says that we agree with the court in theory that iof the person has such a condition that we can determine was not voluntary then by condition.. while this court is willing to exclude conduct that is based against involuntary actions. The trial court said that the jury will not even be able to allow to consider a condition reflex because they did not think that a conditioned action is applicable. The appellate court said that they did buy that excuse or a viable exception even if the defendant was engaged in action. Nevertheless they did not reverse the conviction because there was not enough evidence to reverse the condition. The appellate court will not second guess a verdict based on new facts.