People v. Mero

Summary

The Court of Appeals affirmed the defendant’s convictions for two murders and related evidence-tampering offenses. It held that the trial court acted within its discretion in refusing to sever the charges because the defendant did not show a substantial likelihood that the jury could not segregate the evidence, and the court gave repeated limiting instructions. The court also held that defense counsel’s undisclosed business relationship with a prosecuting assistant district attorney created at most a potential conflict that did not operate on the defense, while rejecting or finding unreviewable the defendant’s remaining claims.