State v. Vandruff

To determine if a trial court erred, there must be a record on appeal with sufficient facts to make such a determination. C.P. v. N.L., 274 Or App 180, 181, 359 P3d 1248 (2015).

Defendant appealed from a conditional guilty plea for misdemeanor driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), reckless driving, and failure to appear. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress statements he made regarding his refusal to perform a breath test and the admission of a judgment of conviction from Clark County, Washington. On appeal, Defendant argued the State failed to show the statements he made were admissible under a Banks analysis (i.e. showing the request was, reasonably, only for physical cooperation and not seeking consent to search). State v. Banks, 364 Or 332, 434 P3d 361 (2019). Additionally, Defendant argued the Clark County conviction document was inadmissible because it was unknown whether it was a copy or an original, and, thus, was not self-authenticating. In response, the State argued that the document was self-authenticating and that Defendant’s conditional plea did not reserve him the right to challenge its authenticity. To determine if a trial court erred, there must be a record on appeal with sufficient facts to make such a determination. C.P. v. N.L., 274 Or App 180, 181, 359 P3d 1248 (2015). The Court held that, because it could not determine whether the record contained the actual or original copy of the document, it was unable to review the document’s admission for error. Reversed and remanded as to the statements.