DPP v Majewski
Encyclopedia
DPP v Majewski [1976] UKHL 2 is a leading English criminal law case, establishing that voluntary intoxication
is no defence to crimes requiring only basic intent, the mens rea
requirement for these being satisfied by the reckless behavior of intoxicating oneself.
He was charged with three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and three counts of assault on a constable in the execution of his duty.
He tried to rely on his intoxication as a "defence" to the charges.
held that he could not rely on intoxication, as it is no defence. It was however recognised that certain offences require a mens rea
element termed specific intent. The requisite mens rea can be disproved if the defendant can prove that he was so intoxicated as to be incapable of forming such an intent.
There is no definite authority or fixed rule on what constitutes a specific intent offence. It is established that murder is but manslaughter is not; there are also specific intent elements in wounding with intent. As a general rule, it can be said that, where recklessness will suffice as mens rea, the crime is one of basic intent. An alternative model is that specific intent is when the mens rea goes beyond the actus reus
, i.e. the defendant contemplates consequences beyond their physical actions.
In the instant case, it was held that assault occasioning ABH is a crime of basic intent. Even when too intoxicated to form a specific intent, the Lords held that one can still form basic intent, and thus the defendant's appeal was dismissed.
Even where intoxication can disprove mens rea, this is not the same as a defence (a justification or excuse for committing the offence); rather it is a denial that all the necessary elements to constitute an offence – namely actus reus and simultaneous mens rea – were present.
Intoxication in English law
Intoxication in English law is a circumstance which may alter the capacity of a defendant to form mens rea, where a charge is one of specific intent, or may entirely negate mens rea where the intoxication is involuntary...
is no defence to crimes requiring only basic intent, the mens rea
Intention in English law
In English criminal law, intention is one of the types of mens rea that, when accompanied by an actus reus , constitutes a crime.-The standard definitions:...
requirement for these being satisfied by the reckless behavior of intoxicating oneself.
Facts
The defendant, Robert Stefan Majewski, committed a series of assaults while under the influence of alcohol and drugs (40 pills of Dexedrine and 8 pills of Nembutal). He attacked the landlord and several customers at a public house; subsequently he attacked the police officer who drove him to the police station following his arrest, and a police inspector at the station.He was charged with three counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and three counts of assault on a constable in the execution of his duty.
He tried to rely on his intoxication as a "defence" to the charges.
Judgment
Dismissing his appeal, the House of LordsHouse of Lords
The House of Lords is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Like the House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminster....
held that he could not rely on intoxication, as it is no defence. It was however recognised that certain offences require a mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
element termed specific intent. The requisite mens rea can be disproved if the defendant can prove that he was so intoxicated as to be incapable of forming such an intent.
There is no definite authority or fixed rule on what constitutes a specific intent offence. It is established that murder is but manslaughter is not; there are also specific intent elements in wounding with intent. As a general rule, it can be said that, where recklessness will suffice as mens rea, the crime is one of basic intent. An alternative model is that specific intent is when the mens rea goes beyond the actus reus
Actus reus
Actus reus, sometimes called the external element or the objective element of a crime, is the Latin term for the "guilty act" which, when proved beyond a reasonable doubt in combination with the mens rea, "guilty mind", produces criminal liability in the common law-based criminal law jurisdictions...
, i.e. the defendant contemplates consequences beyond their physical actions.
In the instant case, it was held that assault occasioning ABH is a crime of basic intent. Even when too intoxicated to form a specific intent, the Lords held that one can still form basic intent, and thus the defendant's appeal was dismissed.
Even where intoxication can disprove mens rea, this is not the same as a defence (a justification or excuse for committing the offence); rather it is a denial that all the necessary elements to constitute an offence – namely actus reus and simultaneous mens rea – were present.
See also
- English criminal lawEnglish criminal lawEnglish criminal law refers to the body of law in the jurisdiction of England and Wales which deals with crimes and their consequences. Criminal acts are considered offences against the whole of a community...
- Intoxication in English lawIntoxication in English lawIntoxication in English law is a circumstance which may alter the capacity of a defendant to form mens rea, where a charge is one of specific intent, or may entirely negate mens rea where the intoxication is involuntary...
- R v LipmanR v LipmanR v Lipman [1970] 1 QB 152 is an English criminal law case establishing that voluntary intoxication, however extreme, can not be a defense to manslaughter...
– an earlier case upholding the principle that intent is irrelevant to a charge of manslaughterManslaughter in English lawIn the English law of homicide, manslaughter is a less serious offence than murder, the differential being between levels of fault based on the mens rea . In England and Wales, the usual practice is to prefer a charge of murder, with the judge or defence able to introduce manslaughter as an option...
.