State v. Mayo

"To admit evidence under OEC 412, a trial court must conduct a three-step inquiry;" first, determine if the evidence concerns past sexual behavior of the victims, second, determine whether the evidence is offered in the form of an opinion or reputation evidence, and third, balance the probative value with the prejudicial effects.

Defendant appealed a determination that evidence could only be introduced to show the victim's motive. Defendant assigned error to the court's denial of evidence that the victim's mother had found her with a boy. Defendant argued that "there was sufficient evidence for the trial court to find by a preponderance that the victim's sexual contact with the boy could explain the medical evidence contained in the CARES examination." The State argued that the evidence supported only an inference and was therefore only admissible to show motive. "To admit evidence under OEC 412, a trial court must conduct a three-step inquiry;" first, determine if the evidence concerns past sexual behavior of the victims, second, determine whether the evidence offered is in the form of an opinion or reputation evidence, and third, balance the probative value with the prejudicial effects. The court held that the evidence was too speculative to allow the evidence to be used for rebutting medical evidence under OEC 412(b)(B). Affirmed.