Convicted of aggravated drunken driving despite assertion of sleep-driving

After a traffic accident on county road 276 north of Stockholm, the driver was charged with aggravated drunken driving. The driver objected that he had been in a somnambular state during the drive, i.e. that he had been driving in his sleep. He pointed out, among other things, that he, along with the alcohol, had taken strong sleeping pills when he went to bed after a stressful day. The driver was convicted in both the District Court and the Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court clarifies that in a situation such as the one in the present case, the criminal significance of sleepwalking should be assessed as a matter of intent. This requirement implies that the offender must have been aware of his actions to some degree. What is required is that the offender has had a certain amount of basic understanding of the context and the environment in which the act is committed.

Furthermore, according to the Supreme Court, there is no reason to look at the evidentiary requirement of intent in the event of an objection of sleepwalking in a different way than what generally applies in criminal cases. The prosecutor must therefore prove that it is beyond reasonable doubt that the perpetrator acted with intent.

In the present case, the Supreme Court notes that the driver took the keys with him and left the apartment, walked over to the multi-car garage, unlocked it with a tag, unlocked the protective grille around the car with another key, opened the car, got into it and drove out of the garage. The drive then went from inside the central parts of Åkersberga, further out of the community and along county road 276 for about seven kilometers before it ended with the accident.

It would therefore have been a rather complex and lengthy action that necessarily included a not insignificant number of observations, traffic decisions and manoeuvres. According to the Supreme Court, it therefore appears extremely unlikely that the driver would have been so unaware of the context and surroundings that he did not understand that he was driving a car during the journey. It was therefore proven that the driver had the intent to drive, and he was convicted of aggravated drunken driving.

Contact

Press contact

Telephone

08-561 666 30

Email

HDO-Presskontakt@dom.se