Summary
upholding the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal because the challenged language could be stricken from the indictment without rendering it subject to demurrer for failure to state a crime, the defendant had demonstrated no prejudice from the variance between the allegations and proof, and the "`amendment' of the indictment did not impermissibly circumvent or supercede the constitutional function of the grand jury by subjecting defendant to trial and conviction based on facts materially different from those presented to the grand jury"
Summary of this case from State v. NewmanOpinion
September 21, 1999