6 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Baskergreen1 sentence1995See State v. Basker, 468 N.W.2d 413, 417 (S.D.1991) [stating that although an information should contain as much specificity as possible, such detail may not be feasible and is not required for a defendant to prepare a defense]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Grand Forks v. Mata
green
2 sentences2005Mata, 517 N.W.2d at 628 . 2005Mata, 517 N.W.2d at 628 . | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Kirkpatrick
neutral
1 sentence2021An information does not require exact specificity but only “enough specificity so that the defendant can prepare a 2 meaningful defense.” State v. Kirkpatrick, 2012 ND 229, ¶ 25 , 822 N.W.2d 851 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Kirkpatrick
green
1 sentence2021An information does not require exact specificity but only “enough specificity so that the defendant can prepare a 2 meaningful defense.” State v. Kirkpatrick, 2012 ND 229, ¶ 25 , 822 N.W.2d 851 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Montplaisir
green
2 sentences2021An information is adequate if it is “sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense.” State v. Montplaisir, 2015 ND 237, ¶ 9 , 869 N.W.2d 435 . 2021An information is adequate if it is “sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense.” State v. Montplaisir, 2015 ND 237, ¶ 9 , 869 N.W.2d 435 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Bertram
green
1 sentence2015He argues the information asserts only legal conclusions of substantial or serious bodily injury to the victim, without describing the nature of any injury. [¶ 9] Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 7(c)(1), an information must contain “a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the elements of the offense charged.” An information is adequate if it is “sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense.” State v. Bertram, 2006 ND 10 , ¶ 23, 708 N.W.2d 913 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Bertram
green
1 sentence2015He argues the information asserts only legal conclusions of substantial or serious bodily injury to the victim, without describing the nature of any injury. [¶ 9] Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 7(c)(1), an information must contain “a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the elements of the offense charged.” An information is adequate if it is “sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense.” State v. Bertram, 2006 ND 10 , ¶ 23, 708 N.W.2d 913 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Frankfurth
green
2 sentences2006In Frank-furth, at ¶ 6, we said technical defects in an information are not fatal to its validity, and notice requirements are satisfied if an information is sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending . charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense. [¶ 24] In Frankfurth, 2005 ND 167, ¶ 2 , 704 N.W.2d 564 , the information charged Frankfurth with gross sexual imposition under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03 for allegedly engaging in a sexual act at. a time when the victim was unaware that a sexual act was being committed on her. 2006In Frank-furth, at ¶ 6, we said technical defects in an information are not fatal to its validity, and notice requirements are satisfied if an information is sufficiently specific to provide the defendant with notice of the pending . charges to enable the defendant to prepare a defense. [¶ 24] In Frankfurth, 2005 ND 167, ¶ 2 , 704 N.W.2d 564 , the information charged Frankfurth with gross sexual imposition under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03 for allegedly engaging in a sexual act at. a time when the victim was unaware that a sexual act was being committed on her. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.