Oregon Supreme Court· 7/19/2018

State v. Henley

Citations

422 P.3d 217
363 Or. 284

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 from forensic interviewer concerning grooming behavior was scientific evidence
noting that the concern about scientific evidence is that a jury might “accord it signif- icant persuasive value”
noting that the concern about scientific evidence is that a jury might “accord it signif- icant persuasive value”
recognizing the “significant persuasive value” that lay people give to evi- dence that is perceived to “rest on science”
focusing on, among other things, on the prosecutor's use of improperly admitted testimony during closing to conclude that the evidence likely affected the verdict
scientific evidence must “pos- sess[ ] the requisite level of scientific validity and reliability for admissibility under OEC 702”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kistler, Nakamoto

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.