Opinion ID: 1937631
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: adequacy of the information's allegations

Text: Schaaf asserts that [f]or the purpose of this case, at least, the elements of the crime charged were, then, the elements of theft as proscribed by Neb.Rev.Stat. Section 28-511(2) (Reissue 1985), and then contends that the information failed to state the date of the alleged offense [or] the value of that which was alleged to have been unlawfully transferred.... Brief for appellant at 14. The State does not dispute Schaaf's characterization of the alleged theft by unlawful disposition of property in violation of § 28-511(2), which provides: A person is guilty of theft if he or she transfers immovable property of another or any interest therein with the intent to benefit himself or herself or another not entitled thereto. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 29-1501 (Reissue 1985) provides: No indictment shall be deemed invalid, nor shall the trial, judgment or other proceedings be stayed, arrested or in any manner affected ... (3) ... for omitting to state the time at which the offense was committed in any case where time is not of the essence of the offense ... nor for want of a statement of the value or price of any matter or thing ... where the value or price ... is not of the essence of the offense.... In State v. Willett, 233 Neb. 243, 246, 444 N.W.2d 672, 675 (1989), we stated: To charge a defendant with the commission of a criminal offense, an information or complaint must allege each statutorily essential element of the crime charged, expressed in the words of the statute which prohibits the conduct charged as a crime or in language equivalent to the statutory terms defining the crime charged. See, also, State v. Turner, 218 Neb. 125, 354 N.W.2d 617 (1984). Nebraska criminal procedure does not require a comprehensive and particularized factual description of elements for the offense charged in the information or complaint against a defendant. [W]here an indictment, information, or complaint alleges commission of a crime, using the language of the statute defining that crime or terms equivalent to such statutory definition, a formal charge against an accused is sufficient. State v. Wehrle, 223 Neb. 928, 930-31, 395 N.W.2d 142, 145 (1986). Under § 28-511(2) of the Nebraska Criminal Code, the elements of theft by unlawful disposition are (1) a person's unauthorized transfer of another's immovable property or unauthorized transfer of any interest in another's immovable property (2) with the intent to benefit himself, herself, or another not entitled to the property or any interest in the property. Cf. State v. Hilpert, 213 Neb. 564, 330 N.W.2d 729 (1983) (theft by deception, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-512 (Reissue 1985)). Although this court has not expressly stated that time is not an essential element of theft, other courts, construing theft statutes substantially similar to § 28-511, have held that time is not an essential element of theft. See, State v. Hatch, 346 N.W.2d 268 (N.D.1984) (exact time of the commission of theft is not a substantive element requiring proof to establish commission of the crime); State v. Jamison, 767 P.2d 134 (Utah App.1989) (time at which a theft was committed generally is not an element which must be established in proving commission of the criminal offense). In State v. Culver, 233 Neb. 228, 231, 444 N.W.2d 662, 665 (1989), we stated: The value of the property stolen is no longer an element of the crime [of theft] and is important only in determining the penalty. Cf. State v. Pierce, 231 Neb. 966, 439 N.W.2d 435 (1989) (value of property is not an element in the crime of criminal mischief, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-519 (Reissue 1985)). Therefore, we hold that neither the time of the criminal appropriation nor the value of the property criminally appropriated is substantive and, therefore, an element of the crime of theft prohibited by § 28-511. Consequently, Schaaf's assignments of error that the information is insufficient on account of a failure to state the exact date of the criminal appropriation and the value of the property criminally appropriated are without merit.