State v. Shepherd

When there is evidence of a witness’s relationship with another person where the bias resulting from the relationship is a matter of reasonable inference rather than mere speculation, the party may impeach that witness for bias. State v. Naudain, 300 Or. App. 222, 230 (2019). An error is reversible “if it denies the jury an adequate opportunity to assess the credibility of a witness whose credibility is important to the outcome of the trial.” State v. Andrew, 297 Or. App. 299, 300 (2019).

Defendant appealed a conviction for delivery of methamphetamine for consideration. Defendant assigned harmful error on the trial court’s refusal to admit impeachment evidence to demonstrate a key witness’s bias, and the court prohibiting Defendant from cross-examining the key witness regarding the source of the witness’ bias. On appeal, Defendant argued that under OEC 609-1(1), the court should allow Defendant to cross-examine the key witness about facts that showed bias, and that the denial of those facts should be admitted under OEC 609-1(2). In response, the State argued that the excluded evidence had minimal relevance, and pointed to the strength of the prosecution’s case. When there is evidence of a witness’s relationship with another person where the bias resulting from the relationship is a matter of reasonable inference rather than mere speculation, the party may impeach that witness for bias. State v. Naudain, 300 Or. App. 222, 230 (2019). An error is reversible “if it denies the jury an adequate opportunity to assess the credibility of a witness whose credibility is important to the outcome of the trial.” State v. Andrew, 297 Or. App. 299, 300 (2019). The Court found the key witness’s credibility as central to the parties’ arguments at trial and the jury didn’t have an adequate opportunity to assess his credibility. Thus, the Court held that the trial court’s error was harmful. Reversed and remanded.