Opinion ID: 2094570
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Amendment to Charging Information

Text: Frink's final argument is that the trial court erred in allowing the State to amend its charging informations a few days before trial, without holding a hearing on the proposed amendments. The changes in the informations were additions of notarizations instead of the original verifications. The Court of Appeals refused to reverse and correctly concluded that this was a change in form and not substance. But the Court of Appeals incorrectly stated that no hearing on the proposed changes was required by Ind. Code § 35-34-1-5(d) which states: (d) Before amendment of any indictment or information other than amendment as provided in subsection (b) of this section [before omnibus date], the court shall give all parties adequate notice of the intended amendment and an opportunity to be heard. Upon permitting such amendment, the court shall, upon motion by the defendant, order any continuance of the proceedings which may be necessary to accord the defendant adequate opportunity to prepare his defense. However, as Frink has not shown prejudice to him by this technical error, we agree with the result reached by the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, we now deny oral argument, grant transfer, vacate the memorandum decision of the Court of Appeals, reverse the Driving While License Suspended conviction, affirm the other convictions, and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings. DeBRULER, GIVAN and DICKSON, JJ., concur. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs in granting transfer, but dissents without opinion on the merits.