That office conducted an inspection and confirmed that hazardous wastes were improperly stored on defendant's premises. Defendant moved for dismissal on seventeen of the counts on grounds that the information failed to charge an offense. The court denied defendant's motion. Defendant entered a guilty plea pursuant to the agreement. This appeal followed.
Defendant raises three issues on appeal.
First, it claims the trial court erred when it denied defendant's motion to dismiss the information for failure to charge a crime. Second, defendant contends that 6612 is unconstitutional. To buttress this argument, defendant contends the three different references to rules within 6612 are intended to have distinct meanings. Defendant also suggests that the use of different words when referring to rules makes it clear that the Legislature reserved for itself the sole authority to define crimes. Therefore, defendant concludes that the State cannot prosecute ANR violations.