Antonio Strickland was convicted in a bench trial of following too closely based on a uniform traffic citation. The citation identified the offense and statute but did not allege the conduct that supposedly violated the law. At the close of evidence, Strickland moved to quash the charge. The Court of Appeals held that the motion raised a general defect in the charging instrument and could be made during trial. A citation used as a charging instrument must either track the elements of the offense or allege facts showing how the defendant violated the law. Merely naming a statute is insufficient because a defendant could admit the citation’s allegations and still not be guilty of an offense. The court rejected a distinction that would give traffic citations less protection than indictments or accusations. Because the citation did not allege the essential elements of following too closely, the trial court erred in denying the motion to quash, and the conviction was reversed.