Opinion ID: 2091416
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Amending the Information

Text: On the morning of trial, the State moved to amend the information to allege that the crime occurred on August 20th, rather than August 18th as originally charged. The prosecutor declared that the victims' statements and all the other discovery material given to Litel had indicated August 20th as the date of the crime. Though Litel objected to the amendment, he did not indicate any surprise at the change, claim he was unprepared to defend a charge concerning that date, or request a continuance for further preparation. The court allowed the amendment. Litel now charges that the amendment was one of substance and should not have been allowed. The record also reveals an amendment filed thirty days before the omnibus date which reflects the August 20th date. The prosecution may amend thirty days before the omnibus date even on matters of substance. Ind. Code § 35-34-1-5(b) (Burns 1985 Repl.). Because the earlier amendment was proper, the amendment filed on the day of trial is of no consequence. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. DeBRULER, GIVAN, PIVARNIK and DICKSON, JJ., concur.