N.C.P.I.—Crim. 305.11

You may find there is evidence which tends to show that the

defendant was [intoxicated] [drugged] [lacked mental capacity] at the

time of the acts alleged in this case.

Generally, [voluntary intoxication] [a voluntary drugged condition]

is not a legal excuse for crime.

However, if you find that the defendant [was intoxicated] [was

drugged] [lacked mental capacity], you should consider whether this

condition affected the defendant’s ability to formulate the specific intent

which is required for conviction of first degree murder.1 In order for you

to find the defendant guilty of first degree murder, you must find, beyond

a reasonable doubt, that the defendant killed the deceased with malice

and in the execution of an actual, specific intent to kill, formed after

premeditation and deliberation. If as a result of [intoxication] [a drugged

condition] [lack of mental capacity] the defendant did not have the

specific intent to kill the deceased, formed after premeditation and

deliberation, the defendant is not guilty of first degree murder.2

Therefore, I charge that if, upon considering the evidence with

respect to the defendant's [intoxication] [drugged condition] [lack of

mental capacity], you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the

defendant formulated the specific intent required for conviction of first

degree murder, you will not return a verdict of guilty of first degree

murder.