v. People, 2020 CO 70

Victim (Z.F.) reported multiple assaults; forensic interview suggested first incident between Nov. 15 and Nov. 27, 2014, and last before Fisher’s March 2015 deployment.
Complaint and information originally charged offenses "between and including November 16, 2014 and March 29, 2015."
Fisher’s defense included an alibi: he was in California for military training from late October until Thanksgiving 2014, which would cover the alleged first incident under the original charging dates.
On the third day of trial, after the prosecution had presented most of its case and after Z.F. and her mother testified, the prosecutor moved to expand the start date to October 1, 2014; the court granted the amendment over defense objection.
Fisher was convicted on all counts; the court of appeals affirmed. The Colorado Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed, holding the mid-trial expansion prejudiced Fisher’s substantial right to prepare and present his alibi defense and ordering a new trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a mid-trial amendment expanding the charged date range is permissible under Crim. P. 7(e) (i.e., whether it prejudices a defendant's substantial rights)	Fisher: Expansion on day three prejudiced his substantial right to prepare and present an alibi (ambush; no time to investigate or secure witnesses).	People: Amendment was permissible because Fisher kept a partial alibi, was not wholly deprived of defense, dates were discoverable, and date is not an essential element.	Court: Expansion did prejudice Fisher’s substantial right under Crim. P. 7(e) given the totality of circumstances (timing and effect on alibi). Convictions vacated and remanded for new trial.

People v. Washam, 413 P.3d 1261 (Colo. 2018) (framework and factors for evaluating mid-trial amendments under Crim. P. 7(e))
Cervantes v. People, 715 P.2d 783 (Colo. 1986) (timing of amendment relevant to prejudice inquiry)
People v. Metcalf, 926 P.2d 133 (Colo. App. 1996) (whether amendment requires different defense strategy bears on prejudice)
People v. Garcia, 940 P.2d 357 (Colo. 1997) (information must give fair opportunity to prepare defense)
People v. Williams, 984 P.2d 56 (Colo. 1999) (information serves notice and double-jeopardy functions; consider surrounding circumstances)
People v. Jefferson, 393 P.3d 494 (Colo. 2017) (error affecting trial fairness and conviction reliability may require reversal)
DeBella v. People, 233 P.3d 664 (Colo. 2010) (reversible error standard when trial fairness impaired)