Oregon Appellate Court 10-12-11
From OCDLA Library of Defense
by: Abassos • October 11, 2011 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Southard - Plain Error - Discretion to Correct
- Dependency - Child's Statements Admissible as Party-Opponent
Southard - Plain Error - Discretion to Correct
The court will not exercise its discretion to correct a plain Southard error where there is overwhelming evidence of guilt. Southard says that a diagnosis of sexual abuse is inadmissible vouching in the absence of physical evidence. Where the defense attorney doesn't object, the court has discretion to correct the plain error. Here, the court does not exercise its discretion because among other evidence there was a detailed and extensive confession and photographs that corroborated the accusations. State v. Pickett
Dependency - Jurisdiction
- A child's out of court statements in a dependency case are admissible from the state against a parent as admissions of a party opponent.
- The court will decline to exercise discretion to review a jurisdiction case de novo where the process seems to have been fair and the decision is consistent with the factual findings.
