Pierre v. State

Summary

The Court held that Pierre’s indictment was void because it charged him with failing to provide employment verification, an act not required by the applicable sex-offender-registration statute. The Court rejected the State’s argument that the employment-verification allegation could be disregarded as surplusage, reversed the Superior Court’s judgment, and vacated the conviction. Because the indictment was defective, the Court did not reach the sufficiency-of-the-evidence issue.