State v. Antonio

"[T]he trial court did not engage in OEC 403 balancing because it determined that the OEC 403 balancing requirement only applied to challenges to prior bad acts evidence. But a trial court’s responsibility to engage in OEC 403 balancing is not limited to prior bad acts evidence. [It] was operating under an incorrect understanding of the law."

Appellant was convicted of sex offenses following the admission of prejudicial information. The trial court did not perform a OEC 403 balancing test, and admitted it because it was not offered as prior bad acts evidence. Appellant appealed, and argued it was error to admit without performing an OEC 403 balancing test. Respondent argued the trial court performed an implicit test. A trial judge is required to perform a OEC 403 balance with every piece of admissible evidence. The Court reasoned that the trial court did not engage in the required test because it determined that 403 only applies to bad acts evidence. The Court held that was an error, and remanded for the trial court to perform a balancing test. Reversed and remand.