Protests 933185-G of Accurate Millinery Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that multiple counts of sodomy and sexual abuse involving different victims were “of the same or similar character” because the defendant’s “offenses were based on the patently ‘similar conduct’ of targeting his young, male family members for sexual purposes”
• observing that limiting instructions on considering evidence of each charge separately can suffice to mitigate any putative prejudice cre- ated by joinder
• explaining that evidence regarding different victims “was admissible for the nonpropensity purposes of proving the particular charges concerning each victim and did not constitute [prohibited] ‘bad acts’ evidence”
• undeveloped argument that constitutional violation “can result” from joinder insuf- ficient to preserve contention that joinder violated the con- stitution in that case
• “We limit our review to the state of the record at the time of the court’s ruling on the motion to sever.”
• “we have repeatedly affirmed trial courts’ denials of motions to sever offenses, notwithstanding mutual inadmissibility of evidence, where the evidence in each case was sufficiently simple and distinct to mitigate the dangers created by joinder.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).