State v. Khoshnaw

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 06-14-2017
  • Case #: A159107
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Shorr, J. for the Court; Armstrong P.J.; & Tookey, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORAP 5.45(4)(a)(iii), an assignment of error challenging an evidentiary ruling, must quote or summarize the evidence that appellant claims was erroneously admitted or excluded; If an assignment of error challenges the exclusion of evidence, appellant also must identify in the record where the trial court excluded the evidence and where the offer of proof was made.

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for murder with a firearm, ORS 163.115, and tampering with a witness ORS 162.285. Defendant assigned error to the trial court's denial of testimony from defendant’s expert witness. Defendant argued that the expert witness was a qualified reserve police officer with a background in police tactics and police use of force. Defendant also argued that the testimony of his witness would be helpful to the jury. “If an assignment of error challenges an evidentiary ruling, the assignment of error must quote or summarize the evidence that appellant believes was erroneously admitted or excluded. If an assignment of error challenges the exclusion of evidence, appellant also must identify in the record where the trial court excluded the evidence and where the offer of proof was made[.]” ORAP 5.45(4)(a)(iii). The Court held that because defendant does not assign error to the trial court’s conclusion that the expert witness’ testimony was “not scientific evidence,” the defendant did not adequately identify any substance to the proposed testimony of his expert witness after omitting any reference to science or research. Affirmed.  

Advanced Search