Citation network
Zafiro Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 02, 1992
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Zafiro v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 506 U.S. 534 (1992) October Term, 1992 Syllabus Zafiro Et Al. V. UnitedSearch
-
F.2d 881 , 885 (1991) (quoting United States v. KeckSearch
-
Opper v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MarchantSearch
-
defenses may be so prejudicial in some circumstances as to mandate severance. See, e. g., United States v. BentonSearch
-
United States v. SmithSearch
-
United States v. Magdaniel-MoraSearch
-
United States v. BerkowitzSearch
-
United States v. HaldemanSearch
-
to grant a severance on grounds of mutually antagonistic or irreconcilable defenses. See, e. g., United States v. TootickSearch
-
United States v. RuckerSearch
-
United States v. RomanelloSearch
-
the tailoring of the relief to be granted, if any, to the district court's sound discretion. See, e. g., United States v. LaneSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
case and they have markedly different degrees of culpability, this risk of prejudice is heightened. See Kotteakos v. UnitedSearch
-
s guilt but technically admissible only against a codefendant also might present a risk of prejudice. See Bruton v. UnitedSearch
-
evidence that would be available to a defendant tried alone were unavailable in a joint trial. See, e. g., Tifford v. WainwrightSearch
-
a district court is more likely to determine that separate trials are necessary, but, as we indicated in Richardson v. MarshSearch
-
merely because they may have a better chance of acquittal in separate trials. See, e. g., United States v. MartinezSearch
-
United States v. MannerSearch
-
to silence. Id., at 862-864. These instructions sufficed to cure any possibility of prejudice. See Schaffer v. UnitedSearch
-
Martinez were not. That, however, is not the standard for 1 See ante, at 538, citing cases. See also State v. KinkadeSearch
-
I hesitate in this case to develop a rule that would govern the very different situation faced in cases like People v. BrauneSearch
-
ante, at 537. The Court correctly notes that a similar preference was announced a few years ago in Richardson v. MarshSearch
-
United States v. TootickSearch
-
F.2d 1078 , 1082 (CA9 1991). See also United States v. RomanelloSearch
-
F.2d 173 , 179 (CA5 1984). 4 See State v. VinalSearch
-
Tootick, 952 F. 2d, at 1082. See also People v. BrauneSearch
-
in the indictment. Justice Jackson's eloquent description of these concerns in his separate opinion in Krulewitch v. UnitedSearch
-
explains why there is much more at stake here than administrative convenience. See also United States v. RomanelloSearch
-
decided the severance motions in this case, I concur in the Court's judgment of affirmance. 6 In neither Opper v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 348 U. S. 84 (1954), nor United States v. MarchantSearch
-
Syllabus Zafiro Et Al. V. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. KeckSearch
-
United States v. BentonSearch
-
See Kotteakos v. UnitedSearch
-
See Bruton v. UnitedSearch
-
Tifford v. WainwrightSearch
-
See Schaffer v. UnitedSearch
-
State v. KinkadeSearch
-
People v. BrauneSearch
-
See State v. VinalSearch
-
Krulewitch v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. LaneSearch
-
United States v. MartinezSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial