NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-153 (2026)

Bill or warrant not quashed for informality

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 15 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Every criminal proceeding by warrant, indictment, information, or impeachment is sufficient in form for all intents and purposes if it express the charge against the defendant in a plain, intelligible, and explicit manner; and the same shall not be quashed, nor the judgment thereon stayed, by reason of any informality or refinement, if in the bill or proceeding, sufficient matter appears to enable the court to proceed to judgment. (37 Hen. VIII, c. 8; 1784, c. 210, s. 2, P.R.; 1811, c. 809, P.R.; R.C., c. 35, s. 14; Code, s. 1183; Rev., s. 3254; C.S., s. 4623.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 122 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1947–2026 · leading case: State v. Hunt, 582 S.E.2d 593 (N.C. 2003).
State v. Hunt, 582 S.E.2d 593 (N.C. 2003). · cites it 12× “In 1811, reacting to a case in which the verdict was overturned based upon an indictment’s failure to allege, among other things, the depth of the victim’s wound, the North Carolina legislature passed what is now codified as N.C.G.S. § 15-153. State v. Moses, 13 N.C.”
State v. Rankin, 821 S.E.2d 787 (N.C. 2018). · cites it 6× “2d at 601 (alteration in original) (quoting N.C.G.S. § 15-153 (2001)). Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, our legislature took further steps to simplify indictments.”
State v. Williams, 781 S.E.2d 268 (N.C. 2016). · cites it 8× “11, which states, in pertinent part, that: “A person required by this Article to register who willfully does any of the following is guilty of a Class F felony: .”
State v. White, 827 S.E.2d 80 (N.C. 2019). · cites it 6× “Every criminal proceeding by indictment is sufficient in form for all intents and purposes if it expresses the charge against the defendant in a plain, intelligible, and explicit manner; and the same shall not be quashed, nor the judgment thereon stayed, by reason of any…”
State v. Spivey, 782 S.E.2d 872 (N.C. 2016). · cites it 6× “2d at 746 ; accord N.C.G.S. § 15-153 (2015). The indictment gives defendant reasonable notice of the charge against him, including the specific parcel of real property he is accused of injuring, so that he may prepare his defense and protect himself against double jeopardy.”
State v. Schalow, 795 S.E.2d 567 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “2d 917 , 919 (1953) ; see N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-153 (2015) ("[The indictment] shall not *572 be quashed .”
State v. Palmer, 239 S.E.2d 406 (N.C. 1977). · cites it 4× “) Warrants and bills of indictment are generally sufficient if they charge the offense "in a plain, intelligible, and explicit manner with averments sufficient to enable the court to proceed to judgment and bar a subsequent prosecution for the same offense.”
State v. Langley, 817 S.E.2d 191 (N.C. 2018). · cites it 3× “2d at 916 (quoting N.C.G.S. § 15-153 (1969) ). 2 "The purpose of an indictment 'is (1) to give the defendant notice of the charge against him to the end that he may prepare his defense .”
State v. Hunt, 792 S.E.2d 552 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “2d 493 , 495 (1968) ; see also N.C.G.S §§ 15-153 ("Bill or warrant not quashed for informality") and 15A-924(a)(5) (2015) ("Contents of pleadings.”
State v. Hammonds, 85 S.E.2d 133 (N.C. 1954). · cites it 6× “Notwithstanding the fact that some of our decisions would seem to support a contrary view, we think the warrant under consideration is sufficient to withstand the defendant's motion when considered in light of the provisions of G.S. § 15-153. All that is required in a warrant or…”
State v. Snyder, 468 S.E.2d 221 (N.C. 1996). · cites it 4× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15-153 (1983). It will not be quashed "by reasons of any informality or refinement, if[,] in the bill or proceeding, sufficient matter appears to enable the court to proceed to judgment.”
State v. Jones, 758 S.E.2d 345 (N.C. 2014). · cites it 3× “” N.C.G.S. § 15-153 (2013). Pursuant to N.C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.