Does section 29.4 of the California Penal Code apply to a defendant who is in a state of intoxication?

Indeed, as articulated over 150 years ago: " 'It will, moreover, occur to every mind that such a principle [(drunkenness voluntarily brought on is no excuse for crime)] is absolutely necessary to the protection of life. In the forum of conscience, there is no doubt considerable difference between a murder deliberately planned and executed by a person of unclouded intellect, and the reckless taking of life by one infuriated by intoxication; but human laws are based upon considerations of policy, and look rather to the maintenance of personal security and social order, than to an accurate discrimination as to the moral qualities of individual conduct. But there is, in truth, no injustice in holding a person responsible for his acts committed in a state of voluntary intoxication. It is a duty which every one owes to his fellow-men, and to society, to say nothing of more solemn obligations, to preserve, so far as lies in his power, the inestimable gift of reason. If it is perverted or destroyed by fixed disease, though brought on by his own vices, the law holds him not accountable. But if, by a voluntary act, he temporarily casts off the restraints of reason and conscience, no wrong is done him if he is considered answerable for any injury which, in that state, he may do to others or to society.' " (See People v. Alexander (1960) 182 Cal.App.2d 281, 291-292 superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in People v. Sexton (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 64, 70; quoting Denio, J., in People v. Rogers (1858) 18 N.Y. 9.)

Defendant's challenge to section 29.4 accordingly fails.

Page 7

The judgment is affirmed.

/s/_________
Blease, Acting P. J.

We concur:

/s/_________
Nicholson, J.

/s/_________
Duarte, J.

Footnotes:

^1. Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

^2. On January 1, 2013, section 22 was renumbered section 29.4. (Stats. 2012, ch. 162, 119.)