Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS / TITLE 1. OF PERSONS LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT FOR CRIME
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 29.4 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)No act committed by a person while in a state of voluntary intoxication is less criminal by reason of his or her having been in that condition. Evidence of voluntary intoxication shall not be admitted to negate the capacity to form any mental states for the crimes charged, including, but not limited to, purpose, intent, knowledge, premeditation, deliberation, or malice aforethought, with which the accused committed the act.

(b)Evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible solely on the issue of whether or not the defendant actually formed a required specific intent, or, when charged with murder, whether the defendant premeditated, deliberated, or harbored express malice aforethought.

(c)Voluntary intoxication includes the voluntary ingestion, injection, or taking by any other means of any intoxicating liquor, drug, or other substance.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 32 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: People v. Soto, 415 P.3d 789 (Cal. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Soto, 415 P.3d 789 (Cal. 2018). · cites it 3× “The Court of Appeal agreed: " Penal Code section 29.4 expressly allows for consideration of voluntary intoxication with respect to express malice.”
People v. Berg, 233 Cal. Rptr. 3d 629 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). “Because evidence of voluntary intoxication is inadmissible to negate the presence of general criminal intent ( Pen. Code, § 29.4, subd. (a) ), we will find no prejudicial error.”
George Wharton v. Kevin Chappell, 765 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2014). “See Cal.Penal Code § 29.4 (intoxication); id.”
People v. Soto, 248 Cal. App. 4th 884 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “Because an actual but unreasonable belief in the *888 need for self-defense negates express malice, Penal Code section 29.4 makes evidence of voluntary intoxication relevant to the state of mind required for imperfect self-defense.”
Steven Red v. Ron Rackley (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “” Cal. Penal Code § 29.4 (a). Section 29.4 admits evidence of voluntary intoxication only on the issue of “whether or not the defendant actually formed a required specific intent.”
Lewis v. Unknown (S.D. Cal. 2022). · cites it 4× “June 15, 2018) (rejecting the same challenge to precursor to 22 California Penal Code section 29.4)). Similarly, in this case, the trial court did not violate 23 Petitioner’s right to due process by instructing the jury under CALCRIM No.”
People v. Soto (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “Because an actual but unreasonable belief in the need for self-defense negates express malice, Penal Code section 29.4 makes evidence of voluntary intoxication relevant to the state of mind required for imperfect self-defense.”
People v. Veloz CA2/5 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “” (Pen. Code, § 29.4, subd. (c).) “Evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible solely on the issue of whether or not the defendant actually formed a required charge or other charged offense .”
People v. Ellebracht CA6 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “3426, which was modified for use in the instant case, is titled “Voluntary Intoxication (Pen. Code, § 29.4).” It states in relevant part as follows: “You may consider evidence, if any, of the defendant’s voluntary intoxication only in a limited 19 way.”
The People v. Rivera CA4/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “[¶] A person is voluntarily intoxicated if he or she becomes intoxicated by willingly using any intoxicating drug, drink, or other substance knowing that it could produce an intoxicating effect, or willingly assuming the risk of that effect. [¶] You may not consider evidence of…”
People v. Gallegos CA4/1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “4[5])" and provides in full: "Voluntary intoxication may cause a person to be unconscious of his or her actions. A very intoxicated person may still be capable of physical movement but may not be aware of his or her actions or the nature of those actions.”
People v. Gallegos CA4/1 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “4[5])" and provides in full: "Voluntary intoxication may cause a person to be unconscious of his or her actions. A very intoxicated person may still be capable of physical movement but may not be aware of his or her actions or the nature of those actions.”
Show all 32 citing cases →
— Cal. Penal Code § 29.4(a) — 1 case
Lewis v. Unknown (S.D. Cal. 2022). “June 15, 2018) (rejecting the same challenge to precursor to 22 California Penal Code section 29.4)). Similarly, in this case, the trial court did not violate 23 Petitioner’s right to due process by instructing the jury under CALCRIM No.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 29.4(b) — 1 case
Lewis v. Unknown (S.D. Cal. 2022). “June 15, 2018) (rejecting the same challenge to precursor to 22 California Penal Code section 29.4)). Similarly, in this case, the trial court did not violate 23 Petitioner’s right to due process by instructing the jury under CALCRIM No.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.