- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Evidence
- Date Filed: 02-12-2025
- Case #: A178197
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Pagán
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant was convicted of first-degree sodomy against “J,” and assigns an error on OEC 401 and 403 on appeal. The court admitted evidence of J’s fear of the defendant, which the defendant claims was not relevant. This was because the victim did not have an ongoing relationship with the defendant. Under OEC 401, evidence is relevant if it has “any tendency” to make an existing fact of significance “more or less probable.” OEC 403 permits exclusion of relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by dangers such as unfair prejudice. The evidence was relevant to explain J’s several-year delay in revealing the abuse. OEC 401 has a “very low threshold,” and evidence that the defendant was verbally and physically abusive was relevant to show why J waited several years to reveal the abuse. In addition, there was no court error under OEC 403. This is because the defendant did not object under OEC 403 at trial. Although the defendant argued on appeal that the evidence’s prejudicial effect substantially outweighed its value, he raised that argument for the first time on appeal, rendering it unpreserved. The court declines to consider the unpreserved OEC 403 claim. Affirmed.