State v. Farr

Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. OEC 801(3). To establish first-degree criminal mischief under ORS 164.365(1)(a)(A), the state must prove that the defendant damaged another’s property “[i]n an amount exceeding $1,000.”

Defendant appealed his conviction of multiple crimes related to a home burglary. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s decision allowing the victim to testify over hearsay objections and denying Defendant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal on the first-degree criminal mischief charge. On appeal, Defendant argued that the victim’s testimony regarding door repair costs was hearsay because the quotes came from Lowe’s employees. In response, the State argued that if the victim’s testimony about the cost of replacement doors was based on their own observations of door prices, the testimony would not be hearsay but direct evidence of market value. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. OEC 801(3). To establish first-degree criminal mischief under ORS 164.365(1)(a)(A), the state must prove that the defendant damaged another’s property “[i]n an amount exceeding $1,000.” The Court reasoned that the employee’s price estimate is direct evidence of the market value of the victim’s repair and replacement costs and was not hearsay. The trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal based on the value of the damaged property evinced by repair or replacement costs. Reversed and remanded for sentencing.