- 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
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.