Petitioner and a codefendant were charged with attempted murder. In a separate criminal proceeding, the codefendant and another person were charged with another murder. The trial court granted a motion to consolidate the cases, so that the charges against petitioner were to be tried with all the charges against the codefendant. Here, the appellate court granted a writ reversing the granting of the motion to consolidate. First, almost none of the evidence concerning the separate episode was admissible against Calderon, and the jurors would have had to have been “remarkable” to avoid improperly allocating responsibility for those crimes to Calderon, since they were members of the same gang. Second, the second offense was an execution-style gratuitous shooting, which would have inflamed the jury. Third, the evidence against Calderon in his case was weak, and the evidence in the second unrelated case against the codefendant was strong. Finally, the case against the codefendant was a special circumstance case and would have created undue prejudice to Calderon.