What is the test for a motion for a separate trial in a sexual assault case?

"'There is a statutory preference for joint trial of jointly charged defendants. ( 1098.) "A 'classic' case for joint trial is presented when defendants are charged with common crimes involving common events and victims."' [Citation.]" (People v. Cleveland (2004) 32 Cal.4th 704, 725-726.) We review a ruling on a motion for separate trials for abuse of discretion (id. at p. 726), confining our review to facts presented to the trial court in connection with the motion. (People v. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324, 388.) "'Under Penal Code section 1098, a trial court must order a joint trial as the "rule" and may order separate trials only as an "exception."' [Citation.]" (Cleveland, at p. 726.)

In denying the motion to sever the trial court applied the six factors listed in People v. Isenor (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 324 (Isenor), to be considered in determining whether to sever based on the claim that a codefendant will offer exonerating testimony. Those factors are: "(1) Does the movant desire the testimony of the codefendant; (2) will the testimony be exculpatory; (3) how significant is the testimony; (4) is the court

Page 11