In People v. Winters (1990) 221 Cal. App. 3d 997, the defendant was arrested for and charged by information with possession of methamphetamine for sale in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11378. He waived a preliminary hearing. at the conclusion of the prosecution's case, the prosecutor moved to amend the information by adding a charge of transportation of methamphetamine in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11379. (221 Cal. App. 3d at p. 999.) The trial court granted the motion and the jury convicted the defendant on both counts. (Ibid.) On appeal, the Winters defendant acknowledged that the law was well established that "'an amendment may be appropriate for the purpose of changing a defect or insufficiency contained in the pleading. Examples of such are: to change a date . . . .'" ( People v. Winters, supra, 221 Cal. App. 3d at p. 1004.) The defendant contended, however, that the addition of a new substantive offense constituted a "change in the offense charged." Since there had been no preliminary hearing, he argued, the factual predicate demanded by Penal Code section 1009 was absent. (221 Cal. App. 3d at p. 1004.) The Court agreed; the court reversed the defendant's conviction for transportation and affirmed the conviction for possession for sale. ( Id. at p. 1008.)