State v. Belieu

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that where codefendants in a joint trial testify as to defendant’s prior criminal activity, “no way existed for defendant to combat the evidence without compounding the prejudice”
• finding a defendant must alert the court to prejudice that arises during trial after the court rejected a pretrial motion to sever to preserve error on the issue
• defendant sought to establish good cause through affidavit that his lawyer did not learn of witness’s testimony until one day before trial
• the prejudicial impact of evidence of defendant’s prior criminal activity, offered as part of a codefend-ant’s defense, had the effect of denying defendant a fair trial
• Use of limiting instructions may be sufficient to prevent any prejudicial “spill-over” effect.
• held that the trial court abused its discretion in overruling a defendant’s renewed motion to sever during the trial, but expressed no opinion as to whether the court abused its discretion in overruling defendant’s initial motion to sever made before the trial began

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).