State v. Roelle

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 03-26-2014
  • Case #: A147715
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, J. for the court; Wollheim, P.J.; & Rasmussen J. pro tempore.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 132.560(3), when a jury can easily separate whether a defendant is guilty of two separate types of crimes, joinder is not necessary to prevent prejudice.

Brian David Roelle (Roelle) was indicted for two drug crimes and 16 person crimes. At trial, Roelle moved to sever these charges into separate trials. The trial court denied that motion. Roelle appealed, arguing that evidence of the two different types of crimes were not mutually admissable. The state responded, arguing that some of the evidence was “sufficiently simple and distinct from the evidence of the person-crime charges to mitigate the dangers of joinder” and therefore severance was not necessary to prevent prejudice to the Roelle. The Court agreed with the state, holding that the evidence of drug crimes and person crimes were sufficiently simple and distinct that a jury would not have trouble separateing them. Affirmed.

Advanced Search