What is the test for a joinder of murder charges?

present case, there is little question that the intent or motivation for the shootings was to eliminate rival gang members. "[T]he intent or motivation with which different acts are committed can qualify as a 'common element of substantial importance' in their commission and establish that such crimes were 'connected together in their commission.' [Citation]." (Ibid.) We conclude the evidence, viewed in its entirety, sufficiently connects the murder charges and satisfies the statutory requirements for joinder. Thus, defendant had "the burden to clearly establish a potential of prejudice sufficient to warrant separate trials." (People v. McKinnon (2011) 52 Cal.4th 610, 630.)

"We review the trial court's decision not to sever counts for abuse of discretion based on the record when the motion was heard. [Citation.]" (People v. Gonzales and Soliz (2011) 52 Cal.4th 254, 281.) A court abuses its discretion if its ruling falls outside the bounds of reason (Alcala, supra, 43 Cal.4th at p. 1220.) '"The factors to be considered are these: (1) the cross-admissibility of the evidence in separate trials; (2) whether some of the charges are likely to unusually inflame the jury against the defendant; (3) whether a weak case has been joined with a strong case or another weak case so that the total evidence may alter the outcome of some or all of the charges; and (4) whether one of the charges is a capital offense, or the joinder of the charges converts the matter into a capital case.' [Citations.]" (Id. at pp. 1220-1221.) Even if the trial court's ruling was correct at the time it was made, we "still must determine whether, in the end, the joinder of counts resulted in gross unfairness depriving the defendant of due process of law." (People v. Gonzales and Soliz at p. 281.)