State v. Barretto

757 A.2d 1161, 59 Conn. App. 654, 2000 Conn. App. LEXIS 416
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided August 29, 2000·No. AC 18528·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant, Samuel Barretto, from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of two counts of sexual assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a) (2),1 one count of sexual assault in the fourth degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-73a (a) (1) (A)2 and three counts of risk of injury to a child in violation of General Statutes § 53-21.3 The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion when it granted the state’s motion to amend the information to change the time when the offenses occurred, [656] thereby denying the defendant a fair trial. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

“The trial court may permit the state, after the start of the trial, to file an amended information to conform to the evidence.” State v. Adams, 38 Conn. App. 643, 649, 662 A.2d 1327, cert. denied, 235 Conn. 908, 665 A.2d 902 (1995). “The defendant must provide a specific showing of prejudice resulting from the state’s delay in providing notice of the charge against which [he] must defend.” State v. Mazzetta, 21 Conn. App. 431, 438, 574 A.2d 806, cert. denied, 216 Conn. 807, 580 A.2d 64 (1990). “The order of the trial court allowing the filing of such an amendment to conform to the evidence is generally within its sound discretion . . . and thus subject to review only upon circumstances indicating an abuse of that discretion.” (Citations omitted.) State v. Ramos, 176 Conn. 275, 276, 407 A.2d 952 (1978).

We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in granting the state’s motion to amend the information to change the time when the offenses occurred and that the defendant was not prejudiced by the court’s decision.

The judgment is affirmed.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Barretto, 757 A.2d 1161, 59 Conn. App. 654, 2000 Conn. App. LEXIS 416 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000).

757 A.2d 1161 (State v. Barretto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Wilson F.
823 A.2d 406 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2003)