IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY,
Plaintiff,
v.
RBWF,
Defendant.
Case No. RSC-CM-3326
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendant in this matter brings a motion to dismiss the charges against him on the basis
that each count, described in the information, is merely a recital of the statutory elements which
create a criminal offense in the Ridgeway Criminal Code. The State does not truly reject this
argument, and cites United States v. Hess, 124 U.S. 483 (1888), saying that “the statutory
language ‘must be accompanied by such a statement of facts and circumstances as will inform
the accused of the specific offense, coming under the general description, with which he is
charged.’” Id. at 487. This precedent quite literally goes against what the State is asking this
court to rule because the States has not alleged any facts whatsoever, only a general legal
description pursuant to the statute. In any case, the State asks that if the court finds that the
information is insufficient here, that the appropriate remedy is not dismissal—rather that a bill of
particulars would resolve the discrepancy. If the State was a black man, the police would shoot
him for reaching that far.
A bill of particulars is relevant and proper only when it describes particulars about certain
acts which have been predetermined. "The indictment must 'allege that the defendant committed
each of the essential elements of the crime charged'; it is not sufficient to merely state the
elements of the crime." United States v. Suarez, 966 F.3d 376, 383 (5th Cir. 2020), citing United
States v. Oberski, 734 F.2d 1034, 1035 (5th Cir. 1984). When the information does not allege
actual acts which meet the essential elements of the crime, a bill of particulars cannot be filed as
there is nothing to be particular about. "It is not enough to allege the crime in the words of the
statute." Frankfort Distilleries v. United States, 144 F.2d 824, 840 (10th Cir. 1944).
1
ORDER
The motion to dismiss is GRANTED, counts 1, 3, and 4 are DISMISSED without
prejudice.
Done: August 28, 2024 SO ORDERED:
At Palmer, Ridgeway
_______________________________
Hon. notsfeelings
Superior Court Judge
2
