State v. Crummett

If charges are properly joined, the party seeking severance of those charges bears the burden of showing that the joinder will effectuate substantial prejudice to the defendant and the court is not to presume it. The party must be specific in demonstrating how the joinder will lead to prejudice and the arguments must relate to specific facts of the defendant’s case.

Defendant was originally charged with 42 offenses that were joined on a single indictment and ultimately convicted of 12 sexual offenses. The offenses involved six different victims under the age of 14 and spanned five years. Defendant argued that instead of a single trial, six trials, one for each victim, should have taken place under ORS 132.560(3). This Court reviewed “based on the record presented to the trial court at the time of the court’s ruling on the motion to sever.” This Court concluded that Defendant did not articulate any definite way that the evidence would be presented at trial which would substantially prejudice him because the charges were joined. Therefore, this Court further concluded, Defendant did not meet his burden to show that substantial prejudice would result due to the joiner. Affirmed.