State v. Hockaday

¶1 Adam Jeffery Hockaday appeals his conviction for resisting arrest. He argues that under State v. Pelkey, 109 Wn.2d 484, 745 P.2d 854 (1987), the trial court *920erred when it allowed the State to amend the resisting arrest charge after the State had rested its case in chief. Because Hockaday was aware of and agreed to the proposed amendment before the State rested its case and moved to amend the information, we conclude that Pelkey does not apply. Because Hockaday does not otherwise allege or show that the trial court erred in granting the State’s motion to amend, we affirm.

FACTS

I. Resisting…