When two or more defendants are jointly charged with any public offense, can the court order separate trials?

The trial court properly denied the severance motions. "When two or more defendants are jointly charged with any public offense . . . they must be tried jointly, unless the court order separate trials." (Pen. Code, 1098.) The legislative preference for joint trials is to "'promote [economy and] efficiency' and '"serve the interests of justice by avoiding the scandal and inequity of inconsistent verdicts."'" (People v. Coffman and Marlow (2004) 34 Cal.4th 1, 40.)

"But the court may, in its discretion, order separate trials 'in the face of an incriminating confession, prejudicial association with codefendants, likely confusion resulting from evidence on multiple counts, conflicting defenses, or the possibility that at a separate trial a codefendant would give exonerating testimony.'" (People v. Avila (2006) 38 Cal.4th 491, 574-575.) On appeal, the trial court's denial of a severance motion is reviewed "for abuse of discretion based on the facts as they appeared at the time the court ruled on the motion. [Citation.] If the court's joinder ruling was proper at the time it was made, a reviewing court may reverse a judgment only on a showing that joinder '"resulted in 'gross unfairness' amounting to a denial of due process."' [Citation.]" (Id. at p. 575.)