The court may at any time before, during, or after a trial amend the indictment, information, or bill of particulars, in respect to any defect, imperfection, or omission in form or substance, or of any variance with the evidence, provided no change is made in the name or identity of the crime charged. If any amendment is made to the substance of the indictment or information or to cure a variance between the indictment or information and the proof, the accused is entitled to a discharge of the jury on his motion, if a jury has been impaneled, and to a reasonable continuance of the cause, unless it clearly appears from the whole proceedings that he has not been misled or prejudiced by the defect or variance in respect to which the amendment is made, or that his rights will be fully protected by proceeding with the trial, or by a postponement thereof to a later day with the same or another jury. In case a jury is discharged from further consideration of a case under this section, the accused was not in jeopardy. No action of the court in refusing a continuance or postponement under this section is reviewable except after motion to and refusal by the trial court to grant a new trial therefor, and no appeal based upon such action of the court shall be sustained, nor reversal had, unless from consideration of the whole proceedings, the reviewing court finds that the accused was prejudiced in his defense or that a failure of justice resulted.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1954–2021 · leading case: State v. O'Brien, 508 N.E.2d 144 (Ohio 1987).
State v. O'Brien, 508 N.E.2d 144 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 2ד2d 800 , a preCriminal Rule case interpreting R.C. 2941.30. While acknowledging that Crim.”
State v. Dilley, 546 N.E.2d 937 (Ohio 1989). · cites it 4ד)” In conjunction with this argument, the state asserts that R.C. 2941.30 also allows amendments to an indictment, both in form and substance, and at any stage of the proceedings.”
State v. Gonzales, 2015 Ohio 461 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2ד7 and R.C. 2941.30. Crim.R. 7 states, in relevant part: (D) Amendment of indictment, information, or complaint The court may at any time before, during, or after a trial amend the indictment, information, complaint, or bill of particulars, in respect to any defect, imperfection,…”
State v. Brooks, 661 N.E.2d 1030 (Ohio 1996). “” See, also, R.C. 2941.30. In State v. O’Brien (1987), 30 Ohio St.”
State v. Ensman, 603 N.E.2d 303 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2ד7(E) and R.C. 2941.30. Crim.R. 7(E) provides that “[a] bill of particulars may be amended at any time subject to such conditions as justice requires.”
State v. Jennings, 176 N.E.2d 304 (Ohio Ct. App. 1959). · cites it 4דIt is the contention of the state that the substitute affidavit was an amendment of the original affidavit and authorized by the provisions of Section 2941.30, Revised Code, which read in part: “The court may at any time before, during, or after a trial amend the indictment,…”
State v. Brooks, 1996 Ohio 134 (Ohio 1996). “” See, also, R.C. 2941.30. In State v. O’Brien (1987), 30 Ohio St.”
State v. Butler, 227 N.E.2d 627 (Ohio 1967). · cites it 2דThe causes are remanded to the Court of Common Pleas with instruction to order the bill of particulars in both causes amended as is provided in Section 2941.30, Revised Code, to allege violations by both defendants of the specific traffic laws aforementioned in this opinion.”
State v. Craft, 908 N.E.2d 476 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009). “” 3 See also R.C. 2941.30; State v. Davis, 121 Ohio St.”
State v. Roberts, 455 N.E.2d 508 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982). “See R.C. 2941.30. We find no error in this unusual procedure, because the amendment resulted in a charge of a lesser included offense, as is allowed under Crim.”
State v. Wallace, 828 N.E.2d 125 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). “7(D) permits a court to amend an indictment “in respect to any defect, imperfection, or omission in form or substance, or of any variance with the evidence, provided no change is made in the name or identity of the crime charged.”
State v. Radebaugh, 450 N.E.2d 291 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 3ד7(D) is essentially an incorporation of R.C. 2941.30 (formerly G.C. 13437-29). At first blush it would appear the broad grant of authority to amend would authorize the action of the trial court herein.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.