Voluntary Intoxication in Florida: Public Policy Versus Due Process and Why Florida's Intoxication Statute Cannot Withstand a Constitutional Challenge

Authors

Michael L. Elkins

First Page

233

Document Type

Comment

Abstract

This comment examines the substance of the opinions in Egelhoff and juxtaposes the Florida statutory scheme against the proper constitutional analysis. The Egelhoff majority has done little to provide a workable constitutional backdrop from which other state statutes banning evidence of voluntary intoxication may be categorized. Part II of this comment provides the historical background for the voluntary intoxication defense. Part I initially examines the factual and legal background of the Egelhoff case as set forth by the Montana Supreme Court. Part IV then provides an analysis of the opinions authored by the United States Supreme Court. This section will narrowly focus on the reasons why Justice O'Connor's dissent both provides the only true workable constitutional analysis and also is the only opinion to receive a majority of the Justices' approval in regards to her rationale. Further, a thorough assessment of Justice Scalia's examination of fundamental due process defenses, through historical and traditional backdrops, is explicated. This section also analyzes the subsequent treatment given to Montana v. Egelhoff by both Federal and State courts. Because of the lack of guidance, other courts have struggled to determine the true essence of the Egelhoff decision. Part V compares the Florida enactment with the analysis provided by Justice O'Connor. This section further evaluates the Florida statute in light of its failure to provide a re-definition of the mens rea requirement. Part VI draws a comparison between the new Florida enactment and those statutes already effective in other jurisdictions. Part VII concludes with a discussion of how Florida may constitutionally ban the defense of voluntary intoxication and also looks to the societal ramifications of eliminating the defense.

Recommended Citation

Michael L. Elkins, Voluntary Intoxication in Florida: Public Policy Versus Due Process and Why Florida's Intoxication Statute Cannot Withstand a Constitutional Challenge, 14 St. Thomas L. Rev. 233 (2001).
Available at: https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol14/iss1/9