State v. Easley

A court must (1) “consciously conduct the required balancing” of the Mayfield test for admissibility of evidence; and (2) “allow for meaning review of that balancing.” State v. Ydrogo, 289 Or App 488, 492, ___ P3d ___ (2017) (emphasis omitted).

Defendant appealed a conviction of murder with a firearm and unlawful use of a firearm. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s admission of evidence. Defendant argued that evidence referencing the incident should be inadmissible because the evidence is too unreliable to meet standards of OEC 402 and OEC 401. Defendant further argued the character evidence was improper because under OEC 404, this type of evidence is only admissible if defendant put character at issue, and prejudicial effect outweighed the probative value. In response, the State argued that Defendant’s argument was not preserved. The State further argued that if the argument is preserved, the State offered ample evidence of character and therefore, was admissible. A court must (1) “consciously conduct the required balancing” of the Mayfield test for admissibility of evidence; and (2) “allow for meaning review of that balancing.” State v. Ydrogo, 289 Or App 488, 492, ___ P3d ___ (2017) (emphasis omitted). The Court of Appeals held that under the “totality of the attendant circumstances” that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it concluded the probative value of the evidence was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Affirmed.