Utah Code

Utah Code § 76-2-306 (2026)

Voluntary intoxication

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1/1/2027

Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense. If recklessness or criminal negligence establishes an element of an offense and the actor is unaware of the risk because of voluntary intoxication, the actor's unawareness is immaterial in a prosecution for that offense.
Voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a sexual offense, as described in Title 76, Chapter 5, Part 4, Sexual Offenses.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: State v. Bryan, 709 P.2d 257 (Utah 1985).
State v. Bryan, 709 P.2d 257 (Utah 1985). · cites it 16× “, 1953, § 76-2-306 provides: [I]f recklessness or criminal negligence establishes an element of an offense and the actor is unaware of the risk because of voluntary intoxication, his unawareness is immaterial in a prosecution for that offense.”
State v. Wood, 648 P.2d 71 (Utah 1982). · cites it 4× “Section 76-2-306 provides that "[v]oluntary intoxication shall not be a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense.”
State v. Standiford, 769 P.2d 254 (Utah 1988). · cites it 6× “[11] Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 provides: Voluntary intoxication shall not be a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense; however, if recklessness or criminal negligence establishes an…”
State v. Cummins, 839 P.2d 848 (Utah Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “Applicable Statutory Provisions Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 (1990) states, in relevant part, that “voluntary intoxication shall not be a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense.”
State v. Tennyson, 850 P.2d 461 (Utah Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “See Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 (1990). The jury instructions as a whole clearly afforded the jury an opportunity to accept defendant’s theory of the case and find him innocent if the jurors determined that the facts bore his theory out.”
State v. Johnson, 784 P.2d 1135 (Utah 1989). · cites it 4× “As support, he cites Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 (1978), which states in part: "Voluntary intoxication shall not be a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense.”
Koehler v. Allen, 2020 UT App 73 (Utah Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “(quoting Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 (LexisNexis 2017)).”
State v. Burke, 2011 UT App 168 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-2-306 , -308 (2008); State v.”
Codianna v. Morris, 660 P.2d 1101 (Utah 1983). · cites it 2× “, 1953, § 76-2-306 states, "Voluntary intoxication shall not be a defense to a criminal charge unless such intoxication negates the existence of the mental state which is an element of the offense .”
Adams v. State, 2005 UT 62 (Utah 2005). · cites it 2× “Under Utah Code section 76-2-306, voluntary intoxication "may negate the existence of a particular intent .”
State v. Jaramillo, 2016 UT App 70 (Utah Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “The voluntary intoxication statute specifies that "if recklessness or criminal negligence establishes an element of an offense and the actor is unaware of the risk because of voluntary intoxication, his unawareness is immaterial in a prosecution for that offense.”
State v. Chacon, 962 P.2d 48 (Utah 1998). · cites it 2× “” Utah Code Ann. § 76-2-306 (1995). In order for intoxication to be a valid defense, “one must be so under the influence of alcohol that at the time of the alleged offense, he was then and there incapable of forming the necessary intent, namely, having a conscious objective or…”
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.