Rogan v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• intent for breaking and entering conviction can be \intent to commit an unspecified misdemeanor\
• \The purpose . . . of specifications in a bill of particulars . . . is to give a defendant reasonable knowledge of the nature and character of the crime charged\ [citation omitted]
• no error in denying defendant’s request that the Commonwealth specify which underlying misdemeanor he allegedly intended to commit when specified misdemeanor was not a required element of the offense and jury could find defendant intended to commit an unspecified crime
• judge did not err in denying defendant’s request that Commonwealth specify underlying misdemeanor “because the particular misdemeanor would not become an element of the crime charged, and indeed, the jury could find the intent to commit an unspecified misdemeanor”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).