State v. Schultz

1981

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Facts: Schultz got drunk. While drunk, he shot a guy. There was a mix-up with the jury instructions.

Posture: Guilty at trial, affirmed on appeal.

Issue: Did the jury instructions violate due process?

Holding: Yes. Reversed and remanded for new trial.

Rule: Intent is an element of murder. Intoxication is a defense that negatives that element. Therefore, under Patterson and Mullaney, it's not permissible to shift onto the defendant the burden of disproving this element.

Reasoning: A reasonable juror could have misunderstood the instruction to say that the defendant had to prove incapacity to form intent. That wouldn't be proper.

Dicta: Dissent: most jurors don't understand the instructions anyway.