State v. Rossiter

"[I]t is not this court's function to speculate as to what a party's argument might be.  Nor is it our proper function to make or develop a party's argument when that party has not endeavored to do so itself." Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific, 186 Or App 696, 700 n2, 64 P3d 1193, adh'd to on recons, 187 Or App 472, 68 P3d 259 (2003). 

Defendant appealed a guilty verdict for first-degree manslaughter charges. Defendant assigned error to (1) the trial court's admission of testimony by experts regarding failure to seek medical care, (2) admission of evidence that showed religious belief guided medical decisions, and (3) the 120-month sentence, as unconstitutionally disproportionate. On appeal, Defendant argued evidence of religious beliefs was unfairly prejudicial and would not be relevant to the case, and that testimony by witnesses on diabetic ketoacidosis violated OEC 702, OEC 703, and OEC 403. In response, the State argued that the evidence supported an inference that Defendant had an affirmative reason to not seek medical care, undercutting the claim that S simply had the flu. Additionally, the State argued Defendant failed to preserve the issues raised on appeal by failing to object on grounds that the evidence was inadmissible under OEC 702, OEC 703, and OEC 403. "[I]t is not this court's function to speculate as to what a party's argument might be. Nor is it our proper function to make or develop a party's argument when that party has not endeavored to do so itself." Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific, 186 Or App 696, 700 n2, 64 P3d 1193, adh'd to on recons, 187 Or App 472, 68 P3d 259 (2003). The Court held that Defendant failed to demonstrate that the trial court erred in making its decisions on witness testimony, evidence admission, and proportionality of the sentence. Affirmed.