In Taylor v. City of Los Angeles (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 611, a police department board of rights tried an officer for destroying criminal evidence. The board initially accused him as follows: " 'On April 4, 1991, at Van Nuys Station, you while on-duty, destroyed a public record when you burned a Polaroid of Ramiro Lopez.' " ( Id. at p. 614.) In his defense, the officer testified he did not know the photograph was to be used in a criminal trial. (Ibid.) After taking the officer's case under submission, the board amended the charging document to conform to proof to allege, " 'On April 4, 1991, at Van Nuys Station, you, while on-duty, destroyed a photograph that you knew or reasonably should have known had a bearing on a pending criminal case.' " ( Id. at pp. 614-615.) The board then sustained the charge and suspended the officer. In reviewing the board proceedings against the officer, the appellate court found nothing improper about the amendment, explaining "amendments to conform to proof are within the broad discretion of the presiding officer of administrative bodies." ( Id. at p. 617.)