State v. Ball

“The Oregon Constitution provides that the victim of a crime has the right ‘to be heard at . . . sentencing.’” Or. Const., Art. I, §42(1)(a).

Appellant, a crime victim, filed a claim in the trial court alleging that the that trial court violated her right to be heard when it sentenced the defendant, who had committed the crimes against her, and interrupted her victim impact statement as well as when it later terminated the statement without warning or explanation pursuant to ORS 147.515. In response, the State agreed with appellant and argued that the trial court erred by denying appellant’s claim; however, defendant argued that appellant’s rights were not violated because she had a reasonable opportunity to be heard at the sentencing hearing and failed to prove that her remaining statement would have been allowed. “The Oregon Constitution provides that the victim of a crime has the right ‘to be heard at . . . sentencing.’” Or. Const., Art. I, §42(1)(a). The Court held that although a trial court has the authority and responsibility to conduct a sentencing hearing in an orderly and expeditious manner and may exclude certain statements by victims, including those that are irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial, or cumulative.  The trial court’s termination of appellant’s statement, when appellant was discussing a relevant topic that was not outside the limits imposed by the trial court, did violate appellant’s right to be heard. Reversed and remanded for a new sentencing hearing.