State v. Anderson
Annotate this CaseDefendant was charged in separate informations with the murders of Rene Pellegrino and Michelle Comeau. The trial court granted the State’s motion to consolidate the cases based on the cross admissibility of the evidence. After a joint trial of both the Comeau and Pellegrino cases, the jury found Defendant guilty of the Pellegrino murder but was unable to reach a verdict in the Comeau case. The trial court rendered judgment in accordance with the jury verdict in the Pellegrino case and declared a mistrial in the Comeau case. On appeal from the judgment of conviction in the Pellegrino case, Defendant claimed that the trial court abused its discretion consolidating the cases for trial. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in consolidating the Pellegrino and Comeau cases for trial on the basis of the cross admissibility of the evidence in the two cases.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.