Does the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on a diminished capacity defense in the context of involuntary manslaughter?

The trial court also erred in failing to instruct the jury on the aspects of involuntary manslaughter in the context of a diminished capacity defense. As stated in People v. Graham, Supra, 71 A.C. 320, 333--334, 78 Cal.Rptr. 217, 225, 455 P.2d 153, 161: 'Intoxication may so diminish a person's mental capacity that he is unable to achieve a specific state of mind requisite to any offense; yet if the intoxication is voluntarily induced, it can never excuse homicide. (Citation.) Thus, the requisite element of criminal negligence is deemed to exist irrespective of unconsciousness, and a defendant stands guilty of involuntary manslaughter if he voluntarily procured his own intoxication.'