Oklahoma Statutes
Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 153 (2026)
Intoxication no defense
✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
OK-LEGoklegislature.gov
JustiaOkla. Stat.
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
No act committed by a person while in a state of voluntary intoxication shall be deemed less criminal by reason of his having been in such condition.
R.L. 1910 Sec. 2095.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases, 1954–2016 · leading case: Crawford v. State, 840 P.2d 627 (Okla. Crim. App. 1992).
Crawford v. State, 840 P.2d 627 (Okla. Crim. App. 1992). “21 O.S.1981, § 153. However, we recognize an exception to this rule where the accused was so intoxicated that his mental abilities were totally overcome and it therefore became impossible for him to form criminal intent.”
Fairchild v. State, 1999 OK CR 49, 998 P.2d 611. “" 21 O.S.1991, § 153. ¶ 31 However, since 1915, Oklahoma has made a limited exception by case-law to § 153 by providing that intoxication may constitute a partial defense to certain types of crimes.”
Sallahdin v. Gibson, 275 F.3d 1211 (10th Cir. 2002). “1990) (citing Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 153 ) (citation omitted).”
Patton v. Mullin, 425 F.3d 788 (10th Cir. 2005). “” See also Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 153 ("No act committed by a person while in a state of voluntary intoxication shall be deemed less criminal by reason of his having been in such condition.”
Taylor v. State, 2000 OK CR 6, 998 P.2d 1225. “Apart from Steve Armstrong's testimony that he and Appellant shared a 12-pack of beer the day of the shooting frenzy, the only evidence Appellant had taken any drugs or consumed alcohol came from Appellant.”
Jones v. State, 648 P.2d 1251 (Okla. Crim. App. 1982). “” 21 O.S.1981, § 153. This principle is premised upon the public policy that one who voluntarily consumes alcohol or narcotics should not be relieved from all criminal responsibility merely because the chemical impaired his mental capacity.”
Turrentine v. State, 1998 OK CR 33, 965 P.2d 955. “21 O.S.1991, § 153. However, we recognize an exception to this rule where the accused was so intoxicated that his mental abilities were totally overcome and it therefore became impossible for him to form the requisite criminal intent.”
Patton v. State, 1998 OK CR 66, 973 P.2d 270. “21 O.S.1991, § 153. However, we recognize an exception to this rule where the accused was so intoxicated that his mental abilities were totally overcome and it therefore became impossible for him to form criminal intent.”
Grissom v. State, 2011 OK CR 3, 253 P.3d 969. “" 21 O.S.2001, § 153. The statutes further provide that "[h]omicide committed with a design to effect death is not the less murder because the perpetrator was in a state of anger or voluntary intoxication at the time.”
Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Todd, 813 P.2d 508 (Okla. 1991). “1984); 21 O.S.1981 § 153. A worker’s injury resulting directly from the intoxication of the injured employee while on duty is not compensable under Workers’ Compensation law.”
Lamb v. State, 767 P.2d 887 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). “In his first assignment of error, appellant contends that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to administer to the jury his requested instructions regarding the defense of voluntary intoxication.”
Boyd v. State, 572 P.2d 276 (Okla. Crim. App. 1977). “The general rule in Oklahoma as stated in 21 O.S.1971, § 153, ⅛ that: “No act committed by a person while in a state of voluntary intoxication shall be deemed less criminal by reason of his having been in such condition.”
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.