Joint trials, when--separate trials for joint defendants,when--probability of prejudice exists, when.
545.880. 1. Notwithstanding supreme court rule 24.06,whenever two or more defendants are jointly charged in anindictment or information, the court shall order both or alldefendants to be tried together. In the event two or moredefendants are charged in separate indictments or informationswith offenses, where both the defendants and the offenses couldhave been joined in the same information or indictment, uponmotion of one or more defendants or on motion of the state, thecourt may order the indictments or informations or both to betried together.
2. If, upon written motion of the defendant, the court findsthat the probability for prejudice exists in a joint trial, thecourt shall order the severance of defendants for trial. Thecourt shall find that the probability for prejudice exists if:
(1) At least one but not all of the defendants jointlycharged is, if convicted, subject to jury assessment ofpunishment; the defendant or defendants subject to juryassessment of punishment shall have the burden of showing theprobability of prejudice if tried jointly;
(2) There is, or may reasonably be expected to be, materialand substantial evidence admissible against less than all of thejoint defendants;
(3) There exists an out of court statement of a codefendantwhich makes reference to another of the joint defendants, but isnot admissible against that defendant, and if the statementcannot be properly limited so as to eliminate reference to thecomplaining defendant;
(4) Severance of the joint defendants is necessary toachieve a fair determination of guilt or innocence of anydefendant.
(1954) Where defendant had been granted a severance it was error for court to state to jury that three persons were originally jointly indicted and one of them had pleaded guilty. State v. Castino (Mo.), 264 S.W.2d 372.
Joint trials, when--separate trials for joint defendants,when--probability of prejudice exists, when.
545.880. 1. Notwithstanding supreme court rule 24.06,whenever two or more defendants are jointly charged in anindictment or information, the court shall order both or alldefendants to be tried together. In the event two or moredefendants are charged in separate indictments or informationswith offenses, where both the defendants and the offenses couldhave been joined in the same information or indictment, uponmotion of one or more defendants or on motion of the state, thecourt may order the indictments or informations or both to betried together.
2. If, upon written motion of the defendant, the court findsthat the probability for prejudice exists in a joint trial, thecourt shall order the severance of defendants for trial. Thecourt shall find that the probability for prejudice exists if:
(1) At least one but not all of the defendants jointlycharged is, if convicted, subject to jury assessment ofpunishment; the defendant or defendants subject to juryassessment of punishment shall have the burden of showing theprobability of prejudice if tried jointly;
(2) There is, or may reasonably be expected to be, materialand substantial evidence admissible against less than all of thejoint defendants;
(3) There exists an out of court statement of a codefendantwhich makes reference to another of the joint defendants, but isnot admissible against that defendant, and if the statementcannot be properly limited so as to eliminate reference to thecomplaining defendant;
(4) Severance of the joint defendants is necessary toachieve a fair determination of guilt or innocence of anydefendant.
(1954) Where defendant had been granted a severance it was error for court to state to jury that three persons were originally jointly indicted and one of them had pleaded guilty. State v. Castino (Mo.), 264 S.W.2d 372.
Joint trials, when--separate trials for joint defendants,when--probability of prejudice exists, when.
545.880. 1. Notwithstanding supreme court rule 24.06,whenever two or more defendants are jointly charged in anindictment or information, the court shall order both or alldefendants to be tried together. In the event two or moredefendants are charged in separate indictments or informationswith offenses, where both the defendants and the offenses couldhave been joined in the same information or indictment, uponmotion of one or more defendants or on motion of the state, thecourt may order the indictments or informations or both to betried together.
2. If, upon written motion of the defendant, the court findsthat the probability for prejudice exists in a joint trial, thecourt shall order the severance of defendants for trial. Thecourt shall find that the probability for prejudice exists if:
(1) At least one but not all of the defendants jointlycharged is, if convicted, subject to jury assessment ofpunishment; the defendant or defendants subject to juryassessment of punishment shall have the burden of showing theprobability of prejudice if tried jointly;
(2) There is, or may reasonably be expected to be, materialand substantial evidence admissible against less than all of thejoint defendants;
(3) There exists an out of court statement of a codefendantwhich makes reference to another of the joint defendants, but isnot admissible against that defendant, and if the statementcannot be properly limited so as to eliminate reference to thecomplaining defendant;
(4) Severance of the joint defendants is necessary toachieve a fair determination of guilt or innocence of anydefendant.
(1954) Where defendant had been granted a severance it was error for court to state to jury that three persons were originally jointly indicted and one of them had pleaded guilty. State v. Castino (Mo.), 264 S.W.2d 372.
