Oregon Supreme Court - November 8, 2018
by: Rankin Johnson • November 12, 2018 • no comments
(Created page with "EVIDENCE — State-of-mind hearsay exception Trial court erred in excluding e-mails about victim’s financial difficulties, providing a motive to rob defendant. Trial court ...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | EVIDENCE — State-of-mind hearsay exception | + | '''EVIDENCE — State-of-mind hearsay exception''' |
Trial court erred in excluding e-mails about victim’s financial difficulties, providing a motive to rob defendant. Trial court reversed, Court of Appeals affirmed, remanded for new trial. | Trial court erred in excluding e-mails about victim’s financial difficulties, providing a motive to rob defendant. Trial court reversed, Court of Appeals affirmed, remanded for new trial. | ||
Revision as of 20:38, November 13, 2018
EVIDENCE — State-of-mind hearsay exception
Trial court erred in excluding e-mails about victim’s financial difficulties, providing a motive to rob defendant. Trial court reversed, Court of Appeals affirmed, remanded for new trial.
Defendant was accused of robbing victim and then killing him. Defendant argued that the victim had robbed defendant and defendant killed him in self-defense. Defendant sought to offer evidence of e-mails the victim had sent about his financial difficulties. Because the statements tended to prove the victim’s state of mind, they were admissible as nonhearsay. The court further explained that, because they went to a central issue in the case, they were not harmless.
State v. Bement 363 Or 760 (November 8, 2018) (Nelson) (Washington County, Knapp)
