- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Evidence
- Date Filed: 03-18-2015
- Case #: A154254
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, P.J., for the Court; Wollheim, S.J., & Lagesen, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant was monitored through a closed-circuit camera in a Walmart store. He was seen replacing price tags on items so they would scan at a lower price at the checkout stand. He was convicted of second-degree forgery. On appeal, Defendant argues that it was error to admit the testimony of the security guard and that the trial court should have demanded the original camera be offered pursuant to Oregon's best evidence rule, under OEC 1002. The Court here found that watching a live camera feed was more akin to a phone conversation than it was watching a previously recorded camera feed. Because of this, the guard was not attesting to the truth of a recording, but instead, testifying to what he observed. Affirmed.