Thomas R. Clark v. Dave Paskett, Warden

972 F.2d 1338 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Thomas R. CLARK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dave PASKETT, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 90-35566. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 24, 1992. * Decided Aug. 28, 1992. Before BRUNETTI, RYMER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thomas R. Clark, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his state conviction for aggravated battery. We review de novo. Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989). We affirm. 3 Clark contends that the information charging him with aggravated battery was defective because it did not specify the nature of the injuries that constituted great bodily harm or indicate the use of a weapon in inflicting the injuries. Consequently, he asserts that he could not prepare an adequate defense. Clark's contention lacks merit. 4 The information is sufficient if it states the elements of the offense…