In a recent ruling, the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona denied Donald Day, Jr.’s motion to sever two firearm-related charges from his trial, which also includes multiple threat charges. The case, United States v. Day, involves allegations that Day made interstate threats, threatened a federal officer, and illegally possessed firearms and ammunition. His legal team sought to have the firearm charges tried separately, arguing that delaying them would allow the Ninth Circuit to resolve a related matter. Additionally, they claimed that trying the charges together would result in unfair prejudice and that separate trials would not be less efficient, given that the evidence for each set of charges is largely distinct.
The government opposed the motion, asserting that the charges were properly joined because they shared a common scheme, involved overlapping evidence, and should be presented together to conserve judicial resources. The Court agreed with the prosecution, concluding that further delays were unjustified, particularly since the trial had already been postponed to await the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Duarte. With no clear timeline for that decision, the Court determined that additional postponements were unwarranted.
Judge John J. Tuchi emphasized that judicial efficiency weighed heavily in favor of keeping all charges together. Because the case arises from the Prescott Division, where trial space is unavailable until at least 2026, proceedings will be held in Phoenix. Holding separate trials would require a larger jury pool and cause additional logistical burdens, making a single trial the more practical option.
The Court further ruled that the firearm charges were sufficiently connected to the threat charges to justify their inclusion in a single trial. The alleged crimes occurred at the same time and location—Day’s rural residence—and involved similar circumstances. The presence of firearms, which were discovered during the search of his property, was also deemed relevant to the threat charges, particularly the allegation that he threatened federal officers. The Court found that evidence of the firearms could impact how the jury evaluates whether Day’s statements were intended as genuine threats, thus reinforcing the legal basis for joinder.
Ultimately, the Court determined that any potential prejudice could be mitigated through appropriate jury instructions. Given the significant evidentiary overlap, the inconvenience of separate trials, and the lack of a compelling reason for further delay, the motion to sever was denied. As a result, the trial, covering all five counts, will proceed as scheduled on April 22, 2025.
Reference: United States v. Day, No. CR-23-08132-PCT-JJT, U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (Mar. 19, 2025).