COLJI-Crim. H:35.5.SP

You have been instructed on the affirmative defense of involuntary

intoxication with respect to the offense of [insert name of specific intent

offense(s)]. You have also received an instruction on whether or not

evidence of the defendant’s self-induced intoxication negates the existence

of the element[s] of [“with intent”] [“after deliberation and with intent”]

[“intentionally”] with respect to [that offense] [those offenses].

You should consider the affirmative defense of involuntary

intoxication before considering the question of self-induced intoxication. If

you find that the prosecution has failed to meet its burden of proof

regarding the defense of involuntary intoxication, as described in that

instruction, then you should disregard the instruction on self-induced

intoxication.

If, however, you find that the prosecution has met its burden of proof

regarding the defense of involuntary intoxication, then you should proceed

to the instruction on self-induced intoxication. Your finding that the

defendant’s conduct was not authorized by the defense of involuntary

intoxication should not influence your decision on whether evidence of the

defendant’s self-induced intoxication negates the existence of the

element[s] of [“with intent”] [“after deliberation and with intent”]

[“intentionally”]; rather, you should consider the question of self-induced

intoxication separately.