§ 9208. Intoxdcation, how considered. Efect on intent. 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. But whenever the actual existence of any particular purpose, motive or intent, is a necessary element to constitute any particular species or degree of crime, the jury may take into consideration the fact that the accused was intoxicated at the time, in determining the purpose, motive or intent, with which he committed the act. [R. C. 1905, § 8545; Pen. C. 1877, § 17; R. C. 1895, § 6815.]
Evidence of intoxication admissible as bearing upon existence of intent. State v. Koerner, 8 N. D. 292, 78 N. W. 981, 73 Am. St. Rep. 752; People v. Odell, 1 D. 189, 46 N. W. 601.
Intoxication no defense if defendant has control of faculties. State v. Ford, 16 S. D. 228, 92 N. W. 18.
Evidence of intoxication may be considered on a prosecution for burglary. State v. Ford, 16 S. D. 228, 92 N. W. 18.
Drunkenness as an excuse for crime. 36 L.R.A. 465; 40 Am. Rep. 560.
-as a defense to homicide. 13 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1024; 25 L.R.A. (N.S.) 376.
Effect of intoxication on the question of heat of passion to mitigate homicide. 5 L.R.A. (N.S.) 825.
As to similar provision in Cal. Pen. Code, 22, see People v. Methever, 132 Cal. 326, 64 Pac. 481.
§ 9209. Morbid propensity, no defense. A morbid propensity to commit prohibited acts, existing in the mind of a person who is not shown to have been incapable of knowing the wrongfulness of such acts, forms no defense to a prosecution therefor. [R. C. 1905, § 8546; Pen. C. 1877, § 18; R. C. 1899, § 6816.]
Kleptomania as a defense to theft. 18 L.R.A. 229.
§ 9210. Acquitted for insanity. Court may commit. When a jury has returned a verdict acquitting a defendant upon the ground of insanity, the court may thereupon, if the defendant is in custody, and it deems his discharge dangerous to the public safety, order him to be committed to the state hospital for the insane, or to the care of such person or persons as the court may direct till he becomes sane. [R. C. 1905, § 8547; Pen. C. 1877, § 19; R. C. 1899, § 6817.]
Confinement of one acquitted of crime by reason of insanity. 1 L.R.A. (N.S.) 540s 25 L.R.A. (N.S.) 946.
§ 9211. Superior power exonerates. Duress. Coverture. The involuntary subjection to the power of a superior which exonerates a person charged with a criminal act or omission from punishment therefor, arises either from:
1. Duress; or,
2. Coverture. [R. C. 1905, § 8548; Pen. C. 1877, § 20; R. C. 1899, § 6818.]
§ 9212. What superior power excuses. The duress which excuses a person from punishment who has committed a prohibited act or omission must be an actual compulsion by use of force or fear. [R. C. 1905, § 8549; Pen. C. 1877, § 21; R. C. 1899, § 6819.]
§ 8213. Superior power inferred. Exceptions. A subjection sufficient to excuse from punishment may be inferred in favor of a wife, from the fact of coverture, whenever she committed the act charged in the presence and with the assent of her husband, except when such act is a participation in:
1. Treason.
2. Murder.
3. Manslaughter.
4. Maiming.
5. Attempt to kill.
6. Rape.
7. Abduction.
8. Abuse of children.
9. Seduction.
10. Abortion, either upon herself or another female.
11. Concealing the death of an infant, whether her own or that of another.
2167
