State v. Jasperse

OEC 403 allows relevant evidence to be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of confusion of the issues or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Defendant was convicted of multiple counts of abuse of his 7-year-old daughter. Defendant assigned error to two rulings excluding evidence which he asserts would have assisted the jury in assessing the victim’s truthfulness. The State argued that the excluded evidence was cumulative and created the possibility of confusing the jury by drawing focus away from the crimes. OEC 403 allows relevant evidence to be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of confusion of the issues or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. The Court agrees with the State, stating that the excluded evidence had minimal probative value as to the charged crimes and the victim’s credibility. Additionally, any probative value regarding the victim’s credibility was cumulative of evidence which the trial court admitted because, in admitted evidence, the victim described events that were not in dispute or were independently confirmed by other witnesses from which the jury could assess the victim’s credibility. The risk of confusion came from the fact that in excluded evidence, the victim described other unrelated crimes committed by Defendant that the jury was asked not to consider. The Court also stated that evidence which was excluded in error was harmless. AFFIRMED.