Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 California opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2025 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Whitmergreen2 sentences2021Under [the informal amendment] doctrine, a defendant’s conduct may effect an informal amendment of an information without the People having formally filed a written amendment to the information.” (People v. Sandoval (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 111, 133 ; see, e.g., People v. Whitmer (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 906 , 919-920 [relying on the doctrine in upholding a conviction on a count not written in the information where the defendant did not object to instructions on that count].) Of course, the informal amendment doctrine “applies only when a defendant had reasonable notice of a sentence enhancement a 2017The "touchstone of determining the adequacy of an accusatory pleading is whether the defendant had adequate notice of the charges against him." ( People v. Sandoval , supra , 140 Cal.App.4th at p. 134 , 43 Cal.Rptr.3d 911 ; Whitmer , supra , 230 Cal.App.4th at p. 919 , 179 Cal.Rptr.3d 112 [the function of an accusatory pleading is to give the accused notice of the charges].) The informal amendment doctrine therefore applies only when a defendant had reasonable notice of a sentence enhancement allegation despite an incomplete pleading. | 3 | 4 |
People v. Sawyersgreen2 sentences2025(Anderson, at p. 960 [not every amendment to a pleading need be made in writing]; People v. Sawyers (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 713, 720 .) “The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written 7. information.” (Sandoval, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at p. 133 .) The prosecutor’s informal amendment to the information was permissible and served to adequately notify Perez the only alleged victim was Hernandez. 2024While that is correct, under the informal amendment doctrine “a defendant’s conduct may effect an informal 5 amendment.” (People v. Sandoval (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 111, 133 (Sandoval); see also People v. Sawyers (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 713, 721 [“[U]nder the ‘informal amendment’ doctrine, a defendant may, by his conduct, impliedly consent to amendment of a pleading.”].) That is what happened in this case. | 2 | 4 |
People v. Sandovalgreen2 sentences2025(Anderson, at p. 960 [not every amendment to a pleading need be made in writing]; People v. Sawyers (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 713, 720 .) “The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written 7. information.” (Sandoval, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at p. 133 .) The prosecutor’s informal amendment to the information was permissible and served to adequately notify Perez the only alleged victim was Hernandez. 2025Under the informal amendment doctrine, “a defendant’s conduct may effect an informal amendment of an information without the People having formally filed a written amendment to the information.” (People v. Sandoval (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 111, 133 .) Aside from the plea agreement itself, there is no other evidence of conduct effecting an informal amendment. | 1 | 8 |
People v. Torored2 sentences2021Thus, it does not matter that “the defense had no apparent reason to consent to one.” (Ibid.; compare Toro, supra, 47 Cal.3d at pp. 976-977 [the defendant’s failure to object on notice grounds to the inclusion of a lesser related offense on the verdict form amounted to implied consent to treat the information as informally amended to include the lesser offense, particularly because the defendant derived a benefit from the submission of the lesser offense to the jury].) 23 trial court regarding the instructions and verdict form. 2020ANALYSIS “Fair notice requires that every sentence enhancement be pleaded in connection with every count as to which it is imposed.” (Anderson, supra, 9 Cal.5th at p. 5 .) An “[o]ral amendment of an accusatory pleading may suffice for statutory and due process purposes. [Citation.] ‘The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written information.’ ” (People v. Pettie (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 23, 82 .) In People v. Toro (1989) 47 Cal.3d 966, 976-977 , disapproved of on other ground in People v. Guiuan (1998) 1 | 1 | 2 |
People v. Houstongreen1 sentence2016Under this doctrine, a defendant's conduct may effect an informal amendment of an information without the People having formally filed a written amendment to the information. [Citation.]" (People v. Sandoval (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 111, 133 ; see also People v. Whitmer (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 906, 919-920 [" '[t]he proceedings in the trial court may constitute an informal amendment of the accusatory pleading, when the defendant's conduct or circumstances created by him amount to an implied consent to the amendment' "].) Moreover, "[b]ecause [appellant] had notice of the sentence he faced and did | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Mancebo
green
2 sentences2024Although an individual charged with a crime has a “ ‘right to fair notice of the specific sentencing enhancement allegations that will be invoked to increase punishment for his crimes’ ” (Anderson, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 953, quoting People v. Mancebo (2002) 27 Cal.4th 735, 747 ), the fair notice requirement is flexible. 2022Citing People v. Mancebo (2002) 27 Cal.4th 735 (Mancebo), defendant suggests “harmless error analysis does not apply” here, because “notice was received too late to cure the defective pleading.” We conclude the error was harmless because defendant has not shown he would have acted differently had the error not occurred. | 2 | 2022–2024 |
People v. Pettie
green
2 sentences2021“Oral amendment of an accusatory pleading may suffice for statutory and due process purposes. [Citation.] ‘The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written information.’ [Citation.]” (People v. Pettie, supra, 16 Cal.App.5th at p. 82 .) 3. 2020ANALYSIS “Fair notice requires that every sentence enhancement be pleaded in connection with every count as to which it is imposed.” (Anderson, supra, 9 Cal.5th at p. 5 .) An “[o]ral amendment of an accusatory pleading may suffice for statutory and due process purposes. [Citation.] ‘The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written information.’ ” (People v. Pettie (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 23, 82 .) In People v. Toro (1989) 47 Cal.3d 966, 976-977 , disapproved of on other ground in People v. Guiuan (1998) 1 | 2 | 2020–2021 |
People v. Guiuan
green
1 sentence2020ANALYSIS “Fair notice requires that every sentence enhancement be pleaded in connection with every count as to which it is imposed.” (Anderson, supra, 9 Cal.5th at p. 5 .) An “[o]ral amendment of an accusatory pleading may suffice for statutory and due process purposes. [Citation.] ‘The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written information.’ ” (People v. Pettie (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 23, 82 .) In People v. Toro (1989) 47 Cal.3d 966, 976-977 , disapproved of on other ground in People v. Guiuan (1998) 1 | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Anderson
green
1 sentence2020ANALYSIS “Fair notice requires that every sentence enhancement be pleaded in connection with every count as to which it is imposed.” (Anderson, supra, 9 Cal.5th at p. 5 .) An “[o]ral amendment of an accusatory pleading may suffice for statutory and due process purposes. [Citation.] ‘The informal amendment doctrine makes it clear that California law does not attach any talismanic significance to the existence of a written information.’ ” (People v. Pettie (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 23, 82 .) In People v. Toro (1989) 47 Cal.3d 966, 976-977 , disapproved of on other ground in People v. Guiuan (1998) 1 | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Oates
red
1 sentence2017As noted, under that doctrine “a defendant’s conduct may effect an informal amendment of an information without the People having formally filed a written amendment to the information.” (People v. Sandoval, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at 11 That the amendment did not include a strike allegation was further evidenced by the fact that the only case cited, People v. Oates (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1048 , related to the section 12022.53, subdivision (d) enhancement. 21 p. 133.) For example, in Whitmer, the defendant was charged with grand theft under former section 487, based on his orchestration of the theft | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.