People v. Langworthy

331 N.W.2d 171 (1982)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Lundy (D) was charged with the rape of his adult sister. The crime carried out with the use of a knife as a threatening weapon, involved three penetrations. At Lundy's (D) bench trial, the major issue centered on D's mental state at the time of the commission of the crime. D's defense was based upon expert testimony regarding his mental state as well as evidence that he had been sniffing glue and drinking alcohol immediately prior to the crime. The court rejected Lundy's (D) insanity defense as well as his intoxication defense, ruling as to the latter that first-degree criminal sexual conduct is a general intent crime. The court of appeals affirmed. As for Langworthy (D), the trial judge found that on the night of November 5, 1976, D, Roy Schipani, and Alan Parker were together indulging in alcohol and drugs. Parker left the house during the early morning hours to purchase cigarettes at a gas station. He met the decedent, William Wedge, who returned to the house with Parker. Wedge was intoxicated and offensive and Wedge made certain comments which irritated D. Wedge then passed out and the three others discussed robbing Wedge. D suggested that they 'blow him away.' Langworthy (D) turned up the stereo, went to a closet where he got a rifle and shot Wedge in the mouth and in the chest. The trial judge held that Langworthy (D) was not mentally ill or legally insane at the time of the commission of the crime. It was found that Langworthy (D) had taken at least 400 milligrams of Valium and some codeine and Nembutal and had been drinking Southern Comfort and Coke at the time of the crime. The judge found that his appreciation of the consequence of his actions was grossly impaired as the result of the drugs and alcohol. The court found him guilty and the appeals court affirmed; second-degree murder is not a specific intent crime and that, therefore, voluntary intoxication was not a defense. Ds appealed.