oh yes, I would agree with that. I just thought adding that detail in, overall, didn’t help them much. In my opinion it was as if the State said - with other words - “and it can also be difficult to ensure all parties involved are receiving everything filed by their co-defendant, but we’ve been giving copies of everything we have filed to both parties every time just as a courtesy, your Honor”
talking about the difficulties in keeping two separate cases & the respective parties up-to-date with what one party may file and then saying you have been giving copies to everyone so far (effectively resolving the issue you’re using to argue in keeping the cases together) — that’s what I was trying to explain. The State’s argument I thought was good and certainly supported by numerous case law, but this small detail I thought didn’t help support their argument/reasoning. that’s all I was trying to express, but I didn’t do a good enough job the first time. I always appreciate hearing how others perceive hearings like this, so thank you.