Court of Appeals of Oregon· 6/1/2011

State v. Branch

Citations

259 P.3d 103
243 Or. App. 309
2011 Ore. App. LEXIS 717

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

concluding that evidence generated by light detection and ranging (lidar
concluding that evidence generated by light detection and ranging (lidar) device was scientific because it was “based on the premise that measurements of distance can be derived through the lidar device’s use of a certain scientific principle, viz., the speed of light”
explaining that, in determining whether evidence is sci- entifically valid, we may consider scientific literature both outside of the record and presented for the first time on appeal
noting that evidence which “draws its convincing force from a scientific principle * * * would be more persuasive to the trier of fact due to its scien- tific nature”
the jury will perceive distance evidence based on lidar as scientific because lidar uses a scientific principle— the speed of light—to measure distance
admitting lidar evidence despite absence of expert testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Armstrong, Edmonds

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.