Sworn statements of a person under the influence?

Question

Does anyone know of any US Code or Case history which makes a sworn statement from a person known to be under the influence of more than one mind altering controlled substance inadmissible in a court of criminal law. If so, please post your links with your answer.

Answer 1

It may not be applicable to this particular situation, but under the UCC, if the person is in a state of mind that is sound enough to understand the nature of what they are agreeing to, an agreement is enforcible.

From the perspective of criminal law, a person who commits a crime while intoxicated is assumed to have been of sound mind when becoming intoxicated, thereby rendering them liable for their criminal acts after they have been intoxicated.

Of the two possible answers I just gave, I'd say the second one is the one most likely to be applicable here, as the person in question was not engaging in contractual agreements, but was actually committing a crime when giving a sworn statement that is false.

Answer 2

A sworn statement may be inadmissible for all kinds of reasons. First of all, it's hearsay. Hearsay is generally inadmissible in a court of law. Hearsay is "an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted." It has all sorts of exceptions, but the reason most hearsay is inadmissible is because the declarant cannot be cross-examined.

Second of all, at least in California, the statement may be inadmissible because, if the declarant is drunk, the statement may be inadmissible because its more prejudicial than probative. By that, I mean, how much "truth-giving" value does a statement by a drunkard have? The Judge might rule, very little.

Your answers to whether or not a particular statement is admissible is found in the Evidence Code relevant to your jurisdiction.

Answer 3

here is one case