Background
Nathaniel Curtis Freeman was charged in one indictment with offenses arising from three incidents. At a May 2021 baby shower, Freeman allegedly retrieved a pistol during an altercation but was persuaded to return it to his vehicle; that incident produced unlawful-use-of-a-weapon and felon-in-possession charges. In April 2022, Freeman allegedly shot and killed G at a birthday party. Ten days later, he allegedly shot and killed V at V’s apartment following an earlier dispute.
Freeman moved to sever the charges from each incident, arguing that they were not of the same or similar character and that trying them together would substantially prejudice him. He also sought to exclude firearm and toolmark identification evidence developed under the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners methodology. The trial court denied both motions, and Freeman was convicted on all remaining charges after a joint trial.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred by joining the May 2021 charges with the charges arising from the two 2022 shootings. Although all three incidents involved firearms, the May 2021 episode occurred almost a year earlier, involved no alleged gunfire, and differed in victims, locations, weapons, and relevant conduct. The misjoinder was not harmless as to Counts 1 and 2 because evidence that Freeman later killed two people with firearms would not have been admissible in a separate trial of the May 2021 charges and could have improperly influenced the verdicts.
The court upheld joinder of the April and May 2022 shooting charges because the same offenses were charged, the incidents occurred only 10 days apart, and some evidence overlapped. Freeman also failed to establish case-specific substantial prejudice beyond that inherent in joining unrelated charges, and limiting instructions could address any remaining prejudice. The court therefore reversed and remanded the convictions on Counts 1 and 2 and otherwise affirmed.
The court separately concluded that admitting the AFTE toolmark evidence was error under controlling precedent but was harmless. The state did not rely on that evidence to prove the May 2021 charges, and Freeman testified that he shot both victims in the 2022 incidents, claiming self-defense.
Key Takeaways
- Charges are not of the same or similar character merely because they all involve possession or use of firearms; courts must examine timing, elements, victims, locations, conduct, and evidentiary overlap.
- Misjoinder was prejudicial as to the May 2021 firearm charges because evidence of two later killings was not cross-admissible and could have influenced both the jury and the trial court.
- The two 2022 shooting cases were properly joined, and generalized concerns about propensity, jury confusion, or conflicting defenses did not establish substantial prejudice.
- Admission of the AFTE toolmark evidence was erroneous but harmless given the other evidence and Freeman’s admissions at trial.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that Oregon’s liberal joinder rule still requires a meaningful factual and legal relationship among charged offenses. Prosecutors cannot create a chain of joinder by pointing to a broad shared feature—such as the presence of a firearm—when the incidents otherwise differ materially.
It also illustrates the different standards governing initial joinder, severance for substantial prejudice, and appellate harmless-error review. Even when limiting instructions defeat a claim of substantial prejudice as to properly joined charges, highly inflammatory evidence from improperly joined charges may still require reversal.