Yes, my lawyer was consulted regarding this. He was the one who wanted to move forward with severing the cases. The cases were initially two different separate cases. The first case was an ongoing investigation. When arrest warrant was carried out, a second case was added(drug trafficking). The second case happened 1 month after 1st case. When I was first arrested, I agreed to the joining of the cases during a court hearing, but at that time I did not understand what was going on. Now that we are approaching trial, I have realized that it was only convenient for the state to put these cases together. Merely for an easier conviction. Furthermore, 1st case does not have solid evidence. The evidence is full of hear say and circumstantial evidence. My lawyer is confident that the first case is only needed by the state to prove the second case during trial. 1st and 2nd case are 1 month apart. 2 different residences. The second case was not my residence. At my last court appearance, the judge made a statement regarding the severance, he said, "if the cases are severed, the jury won't understand what lead them to the second case. They won't know what lead to the arrest." This made me feel very discouraged as I feel he was already leaning towards a denial of the motion. I find this to be very unfair. How am I going to get a fair trial if everything is just "set up" to make me "look" guilty?
