Colo. R. Crim. P. 6.8

As amended through Rule Change 2024(18), effective October 2, 2024

Rule 6.8 - Indictment-Amendment

(a)Matters of Form, Time, Place, Names. At any time before or during trial, the court may, upon application of the people and with notice to the defendant and opportunity for the defendant to be heard, order the amendment of an indictment with respect to defects, errors, or variances from the proof relating to matters of form, time, place, and names of persons when such amendment does not change the substance of the charge, and does not prejudice the defendant on the merits. Upon ordering an amendment, the court, for good cause, may grant a continuance to accord the defendant adequate opportunity to prepare his defense.

(b)Prohibition as to Substance. No indictment may be amended as to the substance of the offense charged.

Annotation The policy underlying this rule is to insure that an indictment reflects the will of the grand jury. People v. Campbell, 194 Colo. 451, 573 P.2d 557 (1978). It was not essential for all members of a grand jury who issued a true bill to specifically observe the formal charging paper and approve its formal language. People v. Campbell, 194 Colo. 451, 573 P.2d 557 (1978). Trial court did not violate this rule by allowing the indictment to be amended to add a charge where the defendant entered into an agreement to plead nolo contendere to the added charge in exchange for a dismissal of all other charges in the indictment. People v. Valdez, 928 P.2d 1387 (Colo. App. 1996). Trial court's addition of habitual criminal counts had no effect on the substance of the indictment or the second degree assault charge and did not violate the provision of this rule prohibiting such amendments under this rule. People v. Martinez, 18 P.3d 831 (Colo. App. 2000). An indictment may be amended to fix defects, errors, or variances of proof, if the change is not substantial or an element of the crime. The indictment was amended to change dates and the dates were not a material element of any of the offenses, therefore, the defendant was not prejudiced. People v. James, 40 P.3d 36 (Colo. App. 2001). Applied in People v. Thimmes, 643 P.2d 780 (Colo. App. 1981).