In Windsor v. State, 683 So. 2d 1027, 1037 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994) the Court of Criminal Appeals found that there was no evidence that the appellant was intoxicated and that, although there was evidence that he had been drinking alcohol on the day of the murder, there was no evidence as to the quantity of alcohol consumed that day by the time of the murder. 683 So. 2d at 1037. The court found that "there was no 'reasonable theory' to support an instruction on intoxication because there was no evidence of intoxication." Id. The court held that the trial court did not err in not instructing the jury on intoxication and manslaughter, because there was no evidence indicating that the defendant was intoxicated when the crime occurred.