Opinion ID: 2525464
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: Failing to challenge the information for being vague

Text: Evans complains that the criminal information alleged that he aided and abetted in committing the four murders without specifying how. The information charged that Evans did wilfully, feloniously, without authority of law and with malice aforethought and premeditation and/or while in the commission of a burglary, kill [each victim], by shooting into her [or his] body with a deadly weapon, to-wit: a firearm, said Defendant acting in concert with and aiding or abetting another person or other persons in the commission of said crime. An information must be a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged. [73] It must either specify the means by which a charged offense was accomplished or allege that the means are unknown. [74] Citing constitutional due process, this court has held that where the prosecution seeks to establish a defendant's guilt on a theory of aiding and abetting, the indictment should specifically allege the defendant aided and abetted, and should provide additional information as to the specific acts constituting the means of the aiding and abetting so as to afford the defendant adequate notice to prepare his defense. [75] The information did not allege any specific acts in regard to aiding and abetting. Thus Evans is correct that the information failed to give him adequate notice of the State's theory of aiding and abetting. However, he must also show that he was prejudiced as a result: Where a defendant has not been prejudiced by the charging instrument's inadequacy the conviction will not be reversed. [76] Evans claims that the State varied its theory of the case according to the whims of its witnesses, but he fails to substantiate this claim with citations to the record. It appears that the State's basic theory of the case did not vary: it alleged that Evans let another man into the victims' apartment, and the two, acting together, shot the four victims to death. We conclude that Evans has demonstrated no prejudice due to the vagueness of the information.