- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
- Date Filed: 09-10-2014
- Case #: A153777
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Devore, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; and Edmonds, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). The state appealed the trial court’s granting of Defendant’s motion in limine, which prevented the state from offering evidence of a prior conviction of DUII. The state assigned error to the trial court’s denial of the state’s request to cross-examine Defendant, arguing that Defendant waived his right against self-incrimination by submitting an affidavit, in which he challenged the validity of a prior DUI conviction. The state contended it had a right to cross-examine Defendant because Defendant’s affidavit amounted to testimony. Defendant argued that: any error was harmless because the evidence in the affidavit was cumulative; defendant did not gain an unfair advantage; and the ruling did not prejudice the state. The Court reasoned that the state had no opportunity to address inconsistencies arising from the affidavit, or to otherwise develop the record regarding Defendant’s statements. The Court held that Defendant, by submitting an affidavit that attacked the validity of a prior conviction, waived his constitutional right against self-incrimination regarding the contents of the affidavit. Reversed and remanded.