2014] CRIME VICTIMS’ RIGHTS 101 crimes or crimes against children.”4! In Indiana, the plain language of its statute leaves open the possibility of a conferral right before formal charges to the extent that the statute includes two separate time frames: “after a crime ... has been charged” or “before any disposition of a criminal case involving the victim.” To be sure, not all states have afforded victims a voice throughout the entirety of the criminal justice process.*? In some states, the statutes are ambiguous.“ In a handful of states, there is clear language limiting rights until after the filing of charges. For example, Louisiana constrains the conferral right to criminal matters “in which formal charges have been filed by the district attorney’s office.” Yet, unlike the federal CVRA, this statute specifically excludes pre-charging situations. And, in any event, despite Louisiana’s limitation on a particular nght within the statute, the legislature in this state still often saw fit to provide the victim with notification rights, even in the absence of the formal filing of charges.**° Very few state courts have ever considered the precise issue of whether conferral rights may attach prior to the formal filing of charges. This is likely caused by the fact that, unlike the federal statute, many state statutes fail to provide the victim with a procedural mechanism for challenging the conduct of prosecutors or law enforcement agencies.**’ However, in rare cases, state courts have implicitly recognized that a meaningful interpretation of victims’ rights should include some rights prior to filing. For example, a Connecticut court concluded that a company injured by the delinquent act of a minor was entitled to information about the case *41 Tpano CODE ANN. § 19-5306(1)\(f) (2004). As in the case of most of the state statutes, the Idaho statute is not without ambiguity. A different provision within the statute makes the notification right contingent “[u]pon the fili