State of Iowa v. Jameesha Renae Allen, 19-1509

Victim DeSean Waldrip called 911 after being chased, stabbed/scratched, and grazed/run over by a blue car; surveillance footage shows a blue car jump a curb and graze him.
Police traced the blue car to Jameesha Allen; Allen admitted on bodycam she was driving and struck Waldrip.
State initially charged Allen with assault causing bodily injury (serious misdemeanor) and criminal mischief; on the first day of trial the State dismissed mischief and moved to amend the assault count to assault while using or displaying a dangerous weapon (aggravated misdemeanor).
The district court allowed the amendment over Allen’s objection; a jury convicted Allen and she was sentenced to a suspended two-year term, probation, and a fine.
The Iowa Court of Appeals reversed, holding the amendment charged a wholly new and different offense; the Iowa Supreme Court granted further review and affirmed that the amendment was improper, vacating the conviction and remanding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State could amend the trial information from assault causing bodily injury to assault while using/displaying a dangerous weapon under Iowa R. Crim. P. 2.4(8)(a)	Amendment merely alleged a different means of the same base offense of assault, not a wholly new offense	Amendment added an element (use/display of dangerous weapon) and increased the penalty, so it charged a wholly new and different offense	Court: Amendment was improper — the amended charge had different elements and increased punishment, so it was a wholly new and different offense; district court erred and conviction vacated
Whether the court needed to reach whether Allen suffered prejudice from the amendment	State implied no substantial prejudice; trial proceeded without continuance	Allen argued prejudice from surprise amendment and higher exposure	Court did not reach prejudice because amendment was already improper under the Sharpe rule; reversal based on illegality of amendment

State v. Sharpe, 304 N.W.2d 220 (Iowa 1981) (announces test: amendment is "wholly new and different" if it adds different/additional elements and increases potential punishment)
State v. Maghee, 573 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 1997) (amendment disallowed where it increased potential punishment)
Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (elements vs. means distinction; elements define what jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Williams, 305 N.W.2d 428 (Iowa 1981) (disallowing amendments that increase punishment except in limited contexts)
State v. Finnel, 515 N.W.2d 41 (Iowa 1994) (different degrees of assault are separate offenses when elements differ)