 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Washington v. Allyn3/7/1985
charge and no other prejudice is demonstrated . . ." State v. Gosser, 33 Wash. App. 428, 435, 656 P.2d 514 (1982). Here, the elements of the crime charged remained the same before and after the amendment. Only the date was changed which has been held not to be material where, as here, no alibi is claimed. State v. Forler, 38 Wash. 2d 39, 42, 227 P.2d 727 (1951).
Further, it is inconceivable that Allyn was prejudiced by the amendment. The entire hearing on the motion to suppress, which was heard before the State moved to amend, centered around the search of the residence on January 7. The amendment was one of form, not of substance. There was no error.
Finally, Allyn contends statements by the prosecutor during closing argument in combination with other alleged errors during trial amounted to cumulative error warranting reversal. We have reviewed the record and find the evidence against Allyn to be so overwhelming that the errors claimed could not have changed the result. Therefore, error, if any, is harmless.
Affirmed.
Disposition
After filing an opinion which was not reported, the court granted reconsideration, withdrew its initial opinion, and affirms the judgment, holding that the police were justified in entering the residence without knocking and waiting, that pretrial publicity was not prejudicial, and that an amendment of the information was not substantial.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Washington DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|