Opinion ID: 146930
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Joinder of conspiracy and carjacking charges

Text: Next, Quinones contends that the conspiracy and carjacking charges were improperly joined under Rule 8(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 8(b) provides: The indictment or information may charge 2 or more defendants if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction, or in the same series of acts or transactions, constituting an offense or offenses. The defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately. All defendants need not be charged in each count. We review de novo whether offenses in an indictment are properly joined. United States v. Cardwell, 433 F.3d 378, 384-85 (4th Cir. 2005). Joinder is proper where the offenses have a logical relationship with one another. Id. at 385. A logical relationship exists “when consideration of discrete counts against the defendant paints an incomplete picture of the defendant’s criminal enterprise.” Id. Having reviewed the record, we find that the carjacking and narcotics charges were properly joined, and this issue is similarly without merit. 6