https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Blog%3ACase_Reviews%2FOregon_Appellate_Court_10-12-11 2026-04-06T09:38:40Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.19.24 https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/Oregon_Appellate_Court_10-12-11&diff=7771&oldid=prev 2012-12-21T00:21:17Z

<p>Importing text file</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>''Read the full article for details about the following new cases:''<br /> * Southard - Plain Error - Discretion to Correct<br /> * Dependency - Child's Statements Admissible as Party-Opponent<br /> <br /> <br /> ===Southard - Plain Error - Discretion to Correct===<br /> <br /> The court will not exercise its discretion to correct a plain [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S055463.htm 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.<br /> [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A143116.pdf ''State v. Pickett'']<br /> <br /> ===Dependency - Jurisdiction===<br /> <br /> # 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.<br /> # 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.<br /> <br /> [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A147584.pdf ''DHS v. GDW'']<br /> <br /> <br /> {{wl-publish: 2011-10-11 21:00:00 -0700 | abassos }}</div>

Maintenance script