Craig Emmett Mendenhall, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court held that the insanity defense due to involuntary intoxication is not available to a defendant who was unconscious or semi‑conscious at the time of the offense, so the trial court did not err in refusing a jury instruction; consequently the Court of Appeals erred and its harmless‑error analysis was unnecessary. The judgment of the Court of Appeals was affirmed.