New Location, Same Tradition: Goldstein & Orr Has Moved Offices Learn More

Client Testimonials
  • "I'm very impressed how Mrs. Orr handled everything, she is very professional and I recommend Mrs. Orr if your in need an attorney for a white collar case!!!" by Anonymous Former Client Read More
  • "The best of the best above all the rest. Accept no substitutes." by Richard R. Read More
  • "They are next level on intelligence and understanding. My full respect to these attorneys." by Amber R. Read More
  • "I was so fortunate and privileged to have Mr. Goldstein in my corner. You will find none better." by Stephen Read More
  • "GGH has no equal in Texas or elsewhere. Cynthia Orr and Gerry Goldstein don't just defend their clients, they make law. I've watched them over the years take impossible cases and win." by Debra I. Read More


Where a single indictment joins offenses, other than as provided above, such constitutes a “misjoinder” of offenses. US v. Goodman, 285 F.2d 378, 379 (5th Cir. 1960), cert. denied, 366 US 930, and failure to grant a severance for separate trial of such offenses constitutes reversible error, regardless of whether a showing of specific prejudice is made. US v. Marionneaux, 514 F.2d 1244 (5th Cir. 1973); US v. Sutton, 605 F.2d 260 (6th Cir. 1979); US v. Chinchic, 655 F.2d 547 (4th Cir. 1981). See also US v. Werner, 620 F.2d 922 (2nd Cir. 1980); Tillman v. U.S., 406 F. 2d 930, 933, n. 5 (5th Cir. 1969); Moore’s Federal Practice and Procedure: Criminal, §14.02[1]; Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure: Criminal, §144. Contra: US v. Friedman, 445 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1971); US v. Aleman, 609 F.2d 298 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 63 L.Ed.2d 780 (1980). The vice inherent in “misjoinder”, which Rule 8(a) attempts to negate, is the harmful spill-over effect of trying an accused for unconnected offenses in the same trial.

(210) 226-1463
  1. Attorneys
  2. Results
  3. Contact