United States v. Joe Dean Swift (86-1079), James C. Hettmansperger (86-1083)

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that joinder was proper because “all of the counts were related and involved many of the same elements of proof’
• noting that \the predominant consideration is whether joinder would serve the goals of trial economy and convenience\
• noting that a court of appeals should \uphold the trial judge's exercise of discretion unless he acts arbitrarily or irrationally\ (quoting United States v. Robinson , 560 F.2d 507 , 515 (2d Cir. 1977) )
• noting that a court of appeals should “uphold the trial judge’s exercise of discretion unless he acts arbitrarily or irrationally” (quoting United States v. Robinson, 560 F.2d 507, 515 (2d Cir. 1977))
• “[W]e hold that a severance motion will be deemed waived if it is not renewed at the end of evidence.”
• “[A] jury is presumed capable of sorting out evidence and considering each count and each defendant separately.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).