State v. Moritz

Appellant raises four propositions of law. Appellant first contends that the trial court committed prejudicial error when it failed to grant a separate trial in this cause, where extrajudicial statements of a codefendant not subject to cross-examination were used against him.

*153Prior to trial, appellant made a motion for a separate trial under Crim. R. 14, which provides, in pertinent part, that:

“If it appears that a defendant or the state is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in an indictment, information, or complaint, or by such joinder for trial together of indictments,…