Anderson

*326 MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-Appellant Lois Marie Anderson appeals her conviction for nine counts of bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 . Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we do not recount it here. We affirm.

Anderson argues that she and her co-defendant, Dr. Joseph Tyrone Alfred, presented mutually antagonistic defenses that were irreconcilable and therefore the district court should have granted her request for severance. A district court’s refusal to sever is reviewed for an abuse of discretion and should be reversed only when the “joint trial was so manifestly prejudicial as to require the trial judge to exercise his discretion in but one way, by ordering a separate trial.” United States v. Abushi, 682 F.2d 1289, 1296 (9th Cir. 1982). Mutually antagonistic defenses may prevent the jury from reliably determining guilt or innocence, and therefore warrant severance, when “the core of the codefendant’s defense is so irreconcilable with the core of the [moving defendant’s] own defense that the acceptance of the codefendant’s theory by the jury precludes acquittal of the defendant.” United States v. Throckmorton, 87…