State v. Ramirez

The harmless error analysis focuses on “the possible influence of the error on the verdict rendered, not whether this court, sitting as a fact-finder, would regard the evidence of guilt as substantial and compelling.” State v. Davis, 336 Or 19, 32, 32 P3d 1111 (2003).

Defendant appealed a conviction of third-degree sexual abuse and revocation of his probation. Defendant argued that the lower court erred by forbidding defendant’s evidence of the victim’s prior inconsistent statements which would establish impeachment. The State argued that although the lower court did err, the prohibition of evidence should be affirmed because the offer of proof was inadequate and the error was harmless. The harmless error analysis focuses on “the possible influence of the error on the verdict rendered, not whether this court, sitting as a fact-finder, would regard the evidence of guilt as substantial and compelling.” State v. Davis, 336 Or 19, 32, 32 P3d 1111 (2003). The Court held that even though they would not likely find the evidence presented by defendant to be persuasive, the Court could not conclude that no fact-finder could find the evidence persuasive in deciding whether to trust the testimony which in turn could affect whether the case had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Reversed and remanded.