#A BILL OF PARTICULARS TRIAL#

In particular, the defendant argued that the complaint was too vague and that it did not allow him to formulate an alibi defense or show lack of opportunity to commit the alleged crimes. The defendant argued that the district court should not have denied his motion for a bill of particulars. Eventually, the defendant was convicted on all three counts. Further, once the victim’s parents found out they reported the activity to Social and Rehabilitation Services. The defendant stated that he refused the victim’s request but the victim said otherwise. Allegedly, the victim saw a sexually explicit program on television and approached the defendant asking him if he would perform sexual acts on her. Frequently, the victim would spend the night at the defendant’s house. The victim was seven years old and the stepdaughter of the defendant’s stepson. In this case, the defendant was charged with one count of aggravated criminal sodomy and two counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a child.

#A BILL OF PARTICULARS TRIAL#

In addressing this question, the court found that decision to require the State to file a bill of particulars was generally up to the trial court, except in such cases where the complaint itself was insufficient to inform the accused of the charges against which he or she must defend. This case explored the question of when the State has to file a bill of particulars. When does the State have to file a Bill of Particulars? The following case answers the question above. Lawyers and other courts then can rely on that ruling when they have a similar issue in their case. When the court decides a certain meeting to the law it essentially answers a legal question. The legislature can’t anticipate every possible fact scenario when they pass a law, so it lay to the courts to interpret the law and give guidance to what it means. Sometimes the black letter law passed by the legislature is unclear.

A bill of particulars