context: (Russell Br. 47-48; North-ington Br. 20.) However, such conclusory allegations of spillover effect do not warrant reversal.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 759 F.2d 1113, 1113
citation_a.parenthetical: "Appellants' conclusory allegations of a spillover effect do not meet their burden for justifying a reversal."
citation_a.sentence: Adams, 759 F.2d at 1113 (“Appellants’ conclusory allegations of a spillover effect do not meet their burden for justifying a reversal.”); see also United States v. Reicherter, 647 F.2d 397, 400 (3d Cir.1981) (“Mere allegations of prejudice are not enough[,] and it is not sufficient simply to establish that severance would improve the defendant’s chance of acquittal.”). The Government presented the evidence of Savage’s intimidation and retaliation in a separate portion of the trial, and it was clear from the indictment and the evidence that only Savage was involved in that conduct.
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 647 F.2d 397, 400
citation_b.parenthetical: "Mere allegations of prejudice are not enough[,] and it is not sufficient simply to establish that severance would improve the defendant's chance of acquittal."
citation_b.sentence: Adams, 759 F.2d at 1113 (“Appellants’ conclusory allegations of a spillover effect do not meet their burden for justifying a reversal.”); see also United States v. Reicherter, 647 F.2d 397, 400 (3d Cir.1981) (“Mere allegations of prejudice are not enough[,] and it is not sufficient simply to establish that severance would improve the defendant’s chance of acquittal.”). The Government presented the evidence of Savage’s intimidation and retaliation in a separate portion of the trial, and it was clear from the indictment and the evidence that only Savage was involved in that conduct.