Since the Court of Criminal Appeals has held that the defense of intoxication can be established by proof of intoxication caused by drugs, narcotics, or hallucinogenic substances, Gibson v. State, 501 P.2d 891 (Okl. Cr. 1972); Myers v. State, 83 Okl. Cr. 177, 174 P.2d 395 (1946), a similar decision should result when the defendant claims involuntary intoxication by reason of drugs, narcotics, or hallucinogenic substances. See Wooldridge v. State, 801 P.2d 729, 734 (Okl. Cr. 1990); Grayson v. State, 687 P.2d 747, 749 (Okl. Cr. 1984).

This instruction should be given only in cases in which involuntary intoxication induced by nonalcoholic substances is used as a defense. The instruction is simply a clarifying instruction for the jury. No clarifying instruction seems to be needed when involuntary intoxication induced by the traditional means of alcohol is used as a defense.