State v. Kinstler

“[A] ‘proper occasion’ to give the statutory witness-false-in-part instruction exists when, considering the testimony and other evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the party requesting the instruction, the trial court concludes that sufficient evidence exists for the jury to decide that at least one witness consciously testified falsely and that the false testimony concerns a material issue.” State v. Payne, 366 Or 588, 468 P3d 445 (2020).

Defendant appealed a trial court’s decision not to deliver statutory witness false-in-part instructions. Defendant argued that the court erred in denying his request for instructions under the Uniform Criminal Jury Instruction (UCrJI) 1029 because the witnesses falsely testified. Defendant argued the jury would infer from those discrepancies. The State argued that the alleged discrepancies are not the kind that enable a jury to make such inferences. Furthermore, the State argued that any error in failing to deliver the instructions was harmless. The Court utilized ORS 10.095(3), an instruction captured by UCrJI, which determines the jury instructions that a trial court must deliver on "all proper occasions." “[A] ‘proper occasion’ to give the statutory witness-false-in-part instruction exists when, considering the testimony and other evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the party requesting the instruction, the trial court concludes that sufficient evidence exists for the jury to decide that at least one witness consciously testified falsely and that the false testimony concerns a material issue.” State v. Payne, 366 Or 588, 468 P3d 445 (2020). The Court found that the evidence identified by the Defendant was legally insufficient to support a finding that the witnesses falsely testified. Affirmed.