A criminal defense attorney in Utah can filed a "Motion for Bill of Particulars" to ask the Court, pursuant to Rule 4(e) of the Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure, to enter an order directing the State to provide a Bill of Particulars in this case.
In many Utah criminal cases, the "Bill of Particulars" is needed to both assist the Court in determining whether evidence that the State has given notice it intends to introduce at trial is admissible and to enable Defendant to adequately prepare his defense to the charges in the Information or the Amended Information.
What happens when the prosecutor makes vague accusations against a person accused of a crime in the charging document. In those cases, the criminal defense attorney should carefully draft and file a motion for bill of particulars prior to arraignment to explain why more particularity is needed.
The attorneys at Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat, LLP understand the importance of the rules of criminal procedure in Utah and how those rules might apply to your case. Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney at Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat, LLP in Salt Lake City, Utah, to discuss your case.
Call (801) 532-5297 today.
Back to top
Rule 4(e) provides, in relevant part, that "[w]hen facts not set out in an information are required to inform the defendant of the nature and cause of the offense charged, so as to enable him to prepare his defense, the defendant may file a written motion for a bill of particulars."
Utah R. Crim. P 4(e) provides that the motion shall be filed at arraignment or within 14 days or "such later time as the court may permit." Id. Further, the Court "may on its own motion, direct the filing of a bill or particulars." Id.
When the Defendant does not file this motion within 14 days of arraignment, or prior to the date agreed upon for filing pretrial motions, the Defendant can ask for leave of Court or that this Court direct the filing on its own motion as provided by Rule 4.
In many cases, the reason for the delay in filing the motion for bill of particulars is because there was some degree of misunderstanding in the nature of the charges which became more apparent after the State provided additional discovery or notices of its intention to introduce additional evidence previously unknown to the defense.
In State v. Bell, 770 P.2d 100, 111 (Utah 1988), the Utah Supreme Court, reversed the defendant's conviction where the State had not given adequate notice of the charges finding that the failure to provide a bill of particulars impeded the accused's ability to prepare for trial - which eroded the court's confidence in the outcome of the trial. Id. For instance, the State's verbatim recitation of the criminal statute is often inadequate and impedes the ability of the defense to understand the State's case.
Back to top
Utah’s Rule 4. Prosecution by Information - Visit the Utah Courts to find Rule 4 for prosecution by information. The rule of procedure in Utah contains the rules for the format required by the rules of the Judicial Council, facts that must be contained in the information, the process for determining whether there is probable cause to support the allegations, reasons the information can be amended, and the requirements of the written motion for bill of particulars.
Back to top
Use the form above to request your free, confidential case evaluation. Our office will contact you as soon as possible to arrange for you to discuss the facts of your case with an experienced criminal defense attorney in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Note: By submitting the above form, you are requesting a free and confidential consultation with one of our attorneys to discuss the specific facts of your case. We will evaluate your unique situation and provide you with valuable information about how an attorney may be able to help you. Please do not provide any confidential or time-sensitive information using this online contact form. If your situation is urgent, please call us at (801) 532-5297. We look forward to hearing from you.
The use of this form for communication with our personnel does not establish an attorney-client relationship.
Mark has represented our son for over ten years. We have a difficult situation but we have never doubted that Mark, and now, Mike, care about him and our family. Their caring advice has been a lifeline for us.
Mike Holje was there for me and helped me get the charges dismissed. He was fantastic. I am so thankful for this firm.
Jim Bradshaw worked with me on a case and was helpful, realistic and very professional. I found him to be one of the best attorneys (and person) I have encountered.
I used Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat and would recommend them to anyone. Everyone in his or her office is kind, efficient and very responsive. You are treated respectfully and on an equal playing field.