Skip to main content
· 7/22/2010

State v. Nonog

Citations

  • 237 P.3d 250

How courts have described this case

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

  • “Because [the appellant] does not argue that he was actually prejudiced by the State’s charging language, the information is constitutionally sufficient.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stephens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.