In People v. Miles, 64 N.Y.2d 731 (1984), a case involving an information charging defendant with issuing bad checks, the Court of Appeals held that pleadings which essentially repeated the language of the statute to the effect that at the time defendant issued the check he knew he had insufficient funds was sufficiently evidentiary and "fulfilled the twofold purpose of an information, which is to inform the defendant of the nature of the charge and the acts constituting it so that he may prepare for trial and protect himself from being tried again for the same offense". In People v Miles, in an information charging the defendant with issuing a bad check, it was alleged in language that essentially repeated the language of the statute, that at the time he uttered the check he knew he had insufficient funds and that he believed or intended that payment would be refused. The Court of Appeals rejected the defendant's claim that the allegations were unacceptably conclusory. In the Court's view, the allegation was sufficiently evidentiary and "fulfilled the twofold purpose of an information, which is to inform defendant of the nature of the charge and the acts constituting it so that he may prepare for trial and protect himself from being tried again for the same offense ... The People's proof on these issues was properly left for trial" ( id., at 732-733).