![]() ![]() In Dzikowski the focus was on the statute which permitted charging reckless endangerment in a short form and also included a statutory provision providing that a defendant was entitled to a bill of particulars. The COA provided guidance on the parameters of a legally sufficient bill, finding that “discovery” does not pass constitutional muster in terms of notice of a charge. The COA reviewed the statutory entitlement to a bill of particulars as to the charge of reckless endangerment in the Dzikowski case and concluded that the State’s response to the defendant’s demand was legally insufficient. Some criminal statutes provide for mandatory bills of particulars and other statutes, with no specific statutory entitlement to a bill of particulars, call upon the trial court to exercise its discretion in deciding whether or not to grant a defendant’s request for a bill of particulars. The COA in Dzikowski held that merely directing a defendant to look to the discovery provided by the State cannot suffice as a substitute for a legally sufficient bill of particulars pursuant to CL 3-206(d)(5). The COA answered that question in the negative and found that the trial court abused its discretion with resulting prejudice to the defendant when it denied Dzikowski’s exceptions to the State’s nonspecific responses to the question posed in his demand for a bill of particulars. The question before the COA in Dzikowski was whether the State’s response to the defendant’s request for a bill of particulars met the statutory requirement if it merely directed the defendant to look to the discovery the State has provided where a defendant, upon timely request, is statutorily guaranteed a bill of particulars detailing the allegations against him and the factual basis of those allegations. ![]() State, 2013 WL 6850029 (12-30-13) the Court of Appeals has infused new vitality into the use of a bill of particulars as a tool to ensure constitutional notice to one charged with a crime where a charging document has been drafted using the statutory short form or is otherwise very general in it allegations. THE BILL OF PARTICULARS – ALIVE AND KICKIN’ AGAIN! You might consider discussing this with a local attorney.The Bill of Particulars – Alive and Kickin’! There are other issues that are not addressed in your post: You mentioned that YOU are taking legal action to recover "our" security deposit - are you pursuing this with one or more co-tenants? Did you, in fact, pay rent on time each and every month? Did you provide the landlord with your forwarding address when you left? And you want to do all of this in separate, numbered paragraphs that each state only one fact (as close as possible). You should be prepared to provide proof of each and every rental payment to negate a claim by the landlord that you left owing rent. And of course you will want to discuss any notice(s) received regarding disposition of your security deposit and your proof of what you had done to cure any allegedly defective conditions that were your responsibility. You will want to describe how the tenancy ended - the circumstances of your leaving, including the date - and what the landlord did or did not do for a post-tenancy inspection. You will want to draw attention to the relevant terms of the lease (the term, the security deposit language, the notice provision (if relevant)). ![]() You will want to identify the parties to the lease, the property involved, the lease itself (include a copy of this as an exhibit). Your bill of particulars needs to set out all of the bases for your claim(s).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |