Also known as: severance of parties · severance of counts · sever parties · sever counts · severance · severance motion
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An order separating the trials of multiple defendants or multiple charges. The order prevents prejudice that would arise from a joint proceeding while preserving judicial efficiency when separate trials are unnecessary.
Sasha Stone, a joint tenant, leases her share of Blackacre to Sierra Solutions for five years. The other joint tenants object and seek a declaration that the lease severs the tenancy. The court holds that the lease does not sever the joint tenancy. Sierra Solutions receives only the occupancy rights Sasha held, and if Sasha dies during the lease term the surviving joint tenants take free of the encumbrance.
Omar, Leo, and Nina are charged in one count with conspiring to defraud customers at Horizon Motors. Omar moves to sever his trial, claiming his limited role will cause prejudice from evidence against the others. The court denies the motion. The single conspiracy allegation permits a joint trial, and any specific prejudice can be addressed by limiting instructions rather than severance.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Sofia Stern and Solomon Silver are tried together for robbery. The prosecution introduces a redacted confession by Sofia that implicates Solomon. Solomon moves for severance, arguing the statement violates his confrontation rights. The court denies severance. Proper redaction and limiting instructions suffice to protect Solomon without requiring separate trials.
Stella Shapiro is acquitted of robbing one victim in a multi-victim incident. The state seeks to try her separately for robbing a second victim from the same event. Stella moves to bar the second prosecution. The court grants relief equivalent to severance of counts. Collateral estoppel prevents relitigation of the common factual issue already decided in her favor.
Spencer Silver and Santiago Sanchez are charged with drug offenses arising from the same transaction. An undercover officer who posed as a participant testifies at their joint trial. Spencer moves for severance, claiming the officer's dual role creates unfair prejudice. The court denies the motion. The shared evidence and overlapping facts support a single trial, with cross-examination available to test the officer's credibility.
Summit Bank holds a mortgage on property owned by a mother facing termination of parental rights. The state seeks to sever the mother's parental rights in a proceeding that also affects the child's property interest. The mother requests separate proceedings because she cannot afford transcripts. The court orders severance of the counts. Separate trials protect the mother's due-process right to meaningful appellate review without imposing unaffordable costs.
A court grants severance when joinder would cause substantial prejudice that cannot be cured by limiting instructions. The moving party must show that a joint trial would prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or innocence. Prejudice arising from differing roles, spillover evidence, or antagonistic defenses can support severance under Rule 14 or equivalent state rules.
Supporting sources
Yes. When multiple defendants are alleged to have participated in one conspiracy, joinder is favored because it conserves resources and allows the jury to see the entire scheme. Separate trials are not required merely because defendants played different roles or joined at different times.
Supporting sources
Severance of counts may be required when collateral estoppel bars relitigation of an issue already decided in the defendant's favor. If acquittal on one count necessarily determines a fact essential to another count, the second prosecution is precluded even if the counts could otherwise be joined.
The court may order severance, redact the statement, or provide limiting instructions. Redaction that removes direct references to the complaining defendant, combined with instructions that the statement may be considered only against the declarant, often eliminates the need for severance.
…in the felony but accused the other of the homicide. On appeal the defendants attacked the trial court’s denial of a severance, and the State argued that neither defendant was harmed by the statements put in evidence at the joint trial because admission of the felony amounted to admission of guilt of felony murder.…