Joinder & Severance Flashcards
arguments for joinder
efficiency for everyone involved - courts run better, victims don’t have to come back, defendants can move on
defendants look better compared to worse ∆s if they only played a minor role
arguments against joinder
prejudicial spillover if there is one crime that he did do, that’ll make him look guilty for the others too
Bruton rule – government might not want to join because you can’t use one ∆’s confessions against the other in a joint trial
severance justifications
risk of prejudicial spillover effect as to evidence only admissable against one ∆
defense counsel might have more control
what do we need to do joinder of offenses
only need 1 of these
1. offenses are of same or similar character
2. offenses involved the same act or transaction
3. offenses involved a common plan or scheme
what does not count as same or similar character
two crimes involving same ∆ or same basic facts (like both crimes involved a gun but not the same gun)
what do we need for joinder of ∆s
only need 1 of these
1. ∆s took part in same act or transaction
2. ∆s took part in same series of acts or transactions
3. offenses involved a common plan or scheme
do we sever for mutually antagonistic defenses
nope – mutually antagonistic defenses do not automatically require severance of ∆s, especially where the ∆s are just pointing the finger at each other
when is severance allowed
when necessary to avoid prejudice to ∆ or to government
what is prejudice sufficient for severance
- could arise from spillover effect of stuff that’s admissible for one ∆ or one count but not others
- could arise from guilt by association
-NOT mutually antagonistic defenses
what is the timeline and standard of proof for joinder
if joinder is challenged prior to trial and judge finds it wasn’t appropriate, case should be severed with no finding of prejudice required
if joinder is challenged for the first time on appeal, appellate court will look for improper joinder AND need a showing of prejudice
