People v. Reinking

Defendant was found guilty of unlawful delivery of a firearm and sentenced to 18 months in prison. On appeal, defendant argued that the trial court erred by denying his pretrial motion to dismiss the indictment, by denying his motion for directed finding, by finding him guilty at the close of the trial, and by rejecting his post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the trial court did not err when it denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment because the indictment properly used statutory language to describe the prohibited conduct and, as a result, stated the nature of the charged offense and, further, that the statute the indictment was based on was not unconstitutionally vague. The appellate court also concluded that the defendant was not entitled to a directed finding of not guilty at the close of the State’s case and that the trial court did not err by finding defendant guilty at the end of the trial because there was sufficient evidence to prove the elements of the offense. Finally, the appellate court held that the trial court did not err when it rejected defendant’s post-trial claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. (DOHERTY and LANNERD, concurring)