Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-231 (2026)

Amendment of indictment, presentment or information

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If there be any defect in form in any indictment, presentment or information, or if there shall appear to be any variance between the allegations therein and the evidence offered in proof thereof, the court may permit amendment of such indictment, presentment or information, at any time before the jury returns a verdict or the court finds the accused guilty or not guilty, provided the amendment does not change the nature or character of the offense charged. After any such amendment the accused shall be arraigned on the indictment, presentment or information as amended, and shall be allowed to plead anew thereto, if he so desires, and the trial shall proceed as if no amendment had been made; but if the court finds that such amendment operates as a surprise to the accused, he shall be entitled, upon request, to a continuance of the case for a reasonable time.

Code 1950, §§ 19.1-175 through 19.1-177; 1960, c. 366; 1975, c. 495.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 84 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Dunaway v. Commonwealth, 663 S.E.2d 117 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dunaway v. Commonwealth, 663 S.E.2d 117 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 31× “On January 31, 2006, having received additional information from “other people” who came forward that appellant was responsible for the distribution of more than five kilograms of crack in a year’s time, the Commonwealth filed a motion pursuant to Code § 19.2-231 to amend the…”

Rawls v. Com., 634 S.E.2d 697 (Va. 2006). · cites it 10× “Rather, the permissibility of an amendment to the warrant in that circumstance is governed by the same standards as for an amendment of an indictment. The Court of Appeals determined that the defendant may be tried on an amended warrant so long as the amendment does not change…”

Powell v. Commonwealth, 552 S.E.2d 344 (Va. 2001). · cites it 12× “On September 14, 1999, the Commonwealth filed a motion pursuant to Code § 19.2-231 to amend the indictment for the capital murder of Stacey to also charge capital murder “during the commission of or subsequent to rape and/or attempted rape and/or sodomy and/or attempted sodomy.”

Commonwealth v. Bass, 786 S.E.2d 165 (Va. 2016). · cites it 4× “If the Commonwealth chooses to do so, the court must re-arraign the accused on the amended indictment and allow the accused to plead anew.”

Ortiz v. Com., 667 S.E.2d 751 (Va. 2008). · cites it 8× “Pursuant to Code § 19.2-231: [I]f there shall appear to be any variance between the allegations [in the indictment] and the evidence offered in proof thereof, the court may permit amendment of such indictment .”

Yvonie Décor Charles v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 756 S.E.2d 917 (Va. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 15× “The parties agreed that the Commonwealth’s motion to amend the indictment was timely pursuant to Code § 19.2-231 and that petit larceny third offense is not a lesser-included offense of grand larceny.”

Willis v. Commonwealth, 393 S.E.2d 405 (Va. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 6× “” Code § 19.2-231 and its predecessors authorize trial courts to amend indictments, provided the amendment does not change the nature and character of the offense.”

Rowe v. Com., 675 S.E.2d 161 (Va. 2009). · cites it 2× “Of course, there is a permissible procedure by which the indictment can be amended to conform to the evidence under Code § 19.2-231, and it is well-established that the accused can waive an objection to the amendment of the indictment.”

Crawford v. Commonwealth, 479 S.E.2d 84 (Va. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 11× “Over Crawford’s objections, the trial judge granted the Commonwealth’s request pursuant to Code § 19.2-231, which allows indictments to be amended at any time before a jury returns a verdict, provided the amendment does not change the nature or character of the offense charged.”

Pulliam v. Commonwealth, 688 S.E.2d 910 (Va. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 5× “Nevertheless, “[t]he limitation on amendment to indictments in Code § 19.2-231 to amendments that do not change the nature or character of the offense is clearly intended to protect the defendant from *714 being deprived of notice of the offense charged.”

Victoria Elizabeth Dufresne v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 791 S.E.2d 335 (Va. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “Code § 19.2-231. - 21 - upon amendment was relied upon by both the Commonwealth and the trial court, and, once amended, the amended indictment became the offense that framed a guilty or not guilty determination.”

Scott v. Commonwealth, 636 S.E.2d 893 (Va. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “The Commonwealth never requested an amendment; the trial court gave no indication that it was amending the indictment sua sponte; and appellant was neither arraigned on an amended indictment nor given an opportunity “to plead anew thereto” or to request a continuance based on a…”

Show all 84 citing cases →

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.