Eric Sakil, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that the trial judge did not err by giving a voluntary‑intoxication instruction because sufficient evidence could lead a juror to consider intoxication, and that the instruction does not shift the State's burden of proving each element. The court also affirmed the trial court's refusal to exclude evidence of the defendant's past mental condition. Accordingly, it reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the conviction.