1. Can I charge more than one misdemeanor offense in a single information? Is there a format for doing this?

2. If the answer to 1 above is "yes," then I presume I can prosecute the two separate misdemeanor offenses committed by one defendant in one trial? (I don't care about whether or not I can "stack" them for punishment.)

3. If the answer to 1 above is "no"....help!

3. My objective: for bad guys who commit same or similar offenses faster than we can deal with them individually, seems like we ought to be able to try more than one offense at one time.

Thx, Mike

Check out Art. 21.24 Code of Criminal Procedure - offenses may be joined in single charging instrument if each arises out of same "criminal episode" as defined by Chapter 3 Penal Code. 3.01 Penal Code defines criminal episode as commission of two or more offenses...[and]1. the offenses are committed pursuant to the same transaction or pursuant to two or more transactions that are connected or constitute a common scheme or plan OR 2. the offenses are the repeated commission of the same or similar offenses.

So, answer to your question is yes, provided you can fit offenses charged into at least one of the above definitions of criminal episode.

1. Joinder of offenses. Yes. CCP 21.24
You can join certain offenses in a single information or indictment that arise out of the same criminal episode. (See PC 3.02.) Each count must charge a separate offense. Callins v. State, 780/176. You can have multiple paragraphs under each count charging alternative theories of the offense, but no paragraph may charge more than one offense. Lawton v. State, 913/542.

2. Filing an information with more than one offense charged.

When I prosecuted misdemeanors, I found it preferable to file different charges as different cases. Why? Because the extra case gave me another bargaining chip in plea negotiations. (i.e., D pleads to class A offense, we 12.45 the class b). This is especially good if you prosecute before a non-lawyer County Judge. It's often easier for a non-lawyer judge to understand dismissing a case than it is to understand abandoning a count.

3. Trying cases together
You can do it, limited by PC 3.02 (gotta be out of the same criminal episode, etc).

A. Judicial economy of the trial court favors joint trials: fewer jurors to pay, less time for the court reporter, less bench time for the judge. Your county judge (aka "Keeper of the County Coffers") appreciates such money-saving ideas.

B. But appellate courts hate joint trials: the record is muddled with cross-evidence, the prosecutors and the defense attorneys don't do as good a job of presenting or arguing each separate case compared to individual trials, and evidence admissible for one reason in one case may not be admissible in the other case. This means both cases get flipped if the appellate court can't wrangle it out.

My rec: File separate informations. Try the cases separately. It just works better in the end. The headaches you cause the county clerk by filing more cases will eventually be offset by making things better for your probation officers (they collect separate probation fees if probation is given), the county auditor or clerk (they collect more money because court costs are assessed based on individual case #'s, not counts within an information), the county judge (more filed cases and more pleas in separate cases translates into more revenues for the county), your CA/DA (raises the cases filed stats, justifies more money from the commissioner's court), and your appellate courts (the records for separate trials are much easier to decypher than joint trials).

Just my $0.02.