a violation of section 39-17-1307 and the commission of a Class C misdemeanor; subsection (a)(1) is the only offense described in section -1307 that is classified as a Class C misdemean- or. As such, we believe that the statutory-reference, together with the factual allegations, gave the petitioner adequate notice of the charged offense. In Tennessee, an indictment as a charging instrument is sufficient if it references the appropriate statute and otherwise meets the statutory requirement for an indictment. State v. Carter, 988 S.W.2d 145, 149 (Tenn.1999) (citing State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725, 726-27 (Tenn.1997)). We believe that the requirements for a warrant are no more demanding than are those for an indictment. See Berry v. City of Memphis, 209 Tenn. 860, 354 S.W.2d 71, 72 (1961) (<HOLDING>). In adjudicating a warrant charging exceeding
holding an indictment alleging that the defendant did unlawfully kill the victim during the perpetration of aggravated robbery in violation of tca 3913202 sufficient because it contained a specific reference to the statute which was sufficient to place the accused on notice of the charged offense holding that a warrant alleging merely a vio sec 759 indecent conduct was sufficient to put berry on notice that he must expect proof of having committed one or more of the five acts constituting the offense and was therefore sufficient and valid holding that in an arson case there must be other proof that the offense was committed to corroborate a confession by the defendant holding military offense of indecent acts with a child must be done in presence of victim holding indecency instructions sufficient to determine indecent acts with a child