This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2007-09-25 |
GARCIA, J. |
||||
| The fundamental test in considering a motion to quash anchored on Section 3(a), above, is the sufficiency of the averments in the information, that is, whether the facts alleged, if hypothetically admitted, would establish the essential elements of the offense charged as defined by law. It is axiomatic that the information must state every single fact necessary to constitute the offense charged, otherwise, a motion to quash on the ground that the information charges no offense may be properly sustained.[13] | |||||