Under New York law, intoxication is a defense only if intoxication negates necessary mental status for a crime (intent/knowledge) and requires high level of intoxication.

• A. Only if intoxication negates necessary mental status for a crime (intent/knowledge)
• B. It negates the necessary mental status for a crime (intent/knowledge) and requires a high level of intoxication
• C. It is never a defense
• D. It is available for all crimes regardless of mental state

Answer: (B)

Intoxication works as a defense in New York only when it defeats the mental state the crime requires. If the statute calls for a specific intent or knowledge, a defendant who is intoxicated enough to prevent forming that intent can raise the defense. In contrast, crimes that only require general intent, recklessness, or negligence aren’t subject to this defense because the mental state isn’t the same as a specific intent or knowledge element. The defense hinges on whether the intoxication is substantial enough to negate the required mens rea, not merely on any amount of intoxication. That combination—negating the necessary mental state and being sufficiently severe to do so—is why this option is correct.