State v. Hudson

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Evidence
  • Date Filed: 07-20-2016
  • Case #: A153860
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Garrett, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & DeVore, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under OEC 103, evidentiary errors are not presumed to be prejudicial. A defendant’s conviction due to an evidentiary error cannot be reversed unless the defendant can demonstrate that he or she was actually prejudiced by that error.

Defendant appealed the trial court’s decision to exclude, as irrelevant, computer-generated images. Defendant further argued that the computer-generated images were relevant because the images would have supported Defendant’s self-defense theory and rehabilitated Defendant’s expert witness. This Court found that the computer-generated images were relevant and should not have been excluded, however, OEC 103(1) states that evidentiary errors are not presumed to be prejudicial. Subsequently, State v. Davis held that if a defendant demonstrated that the evidentiary error was not harmless, a defendant’s conviction may be reversed. 336 Or. 19, 32, 77 P.3d 1111 (2003). This Court held that the exclusion of the computer-generated images was not harmless error because the images presented qualitatively different proof than the other admitted evidence. Reversed and remanded.

Advanced Search