Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): it could have provided a similar definition of unborn children, as in the previously existing N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1.” Geiser, at ¶ 17. [¶ 18] Chapter 12.1-17.1, N.D.C.C., also expressly excludes criminalizing acts committed on the unborn child by the pregnant woman: Charging a pregnant woman for a crime allegedly committed against her unborn child violates the express legislative policy of N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1. Our holding that a pregnant woman cannot be charged for a crime allegedly committed against her unborn child under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.l-22.2(l)(b) coincides with ... N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-17.1. Geiser, at ¶ 19 (emphasis added). [¶ 19] The State argues Geiser is not applicable because Geiser’s unborn child died in útero. Our conclusion and analysis in Geiser did not hin 991) (<HOLDING>); State v. Aiwohi, 109 Hawai'i 115, 123 P.3d 
 Holding statements: (A) holding ohios child endangerment statute does not apply to mothers who abuse drugs during pregnancy (B) holding an unborn viable fetus is not a human being under the new mexico child abuse statute and the mothers use of cocaine during pregnancy was not child abuse (C) holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was factually sufficient to support termination (D) holding evidence that mother allowed child to remain in home in which there was violent conduct as evidenced by fathers physical abuse of mother during her pregnancy was legally sufficient to support termination (E) holding child abuse statute clearly did not apply to fetuses and therefore did not apply to a mother who ingested cocaine during pregnancy
Output (English): holding an unborn viable fetus is not a human being under the new mexico child abuse statute and the mothers use of cocaine during pregnancy was not child abuse