Opinion ID: 576697
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: denial of pretrial severance motions

Text: 27 Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 14, courts are authorized to grant a severance of defendants if a joint trial would be prejudicial. However, a joint trial of co-conspirators is presumptively appropriate, and we review a district court's refusal of a severance motion under an abuse of discretion standard. United States v. Bond, 847 F.2d 1233, 1240 (7th Cir.1988). Severance is mandatory only if the anticipated defenses of two co-defendants are  'mutually antagonistic' --that is, only if the acceptance of one party's defense will preclude the acquittal of the other. United States v. Ziperstein, 601 F.2d 281, 285 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1031, 100 S.Ct. 701, 62 L.Ed.2d 667 (1980). 13 In a memorandum in support of his motion to sever, Mr. Chapman contended only that Mr. Wright was likely to admit participation in the Twelve Mile bank robbery and to rely on the intoxication defense that he had offered in state court. However, a jury could have believed that Mr. Wright lacked the specific intent to engage in bank robbery without necessarily concluding that Mr. Chapman was guilty of the same robbery. 14 Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Mr. Chapman's pretrial severance motions. 28