Court of Appeals of Oregon· 8/14/2013

State v. Higgins

Citations

258 Or. App. 177
308 P.3d 352
2013 WL 4171226
2013 Ore. App. LEXIS 951

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the trial court erred in failing to strike vouching testimony sua sponte even though it was not elicited by counsel’s question
holding that admission of vouching testimony was likely harmful because there was no physical evidence of abuse and it came from the complainant’s parent, who was “privy to the complainant’s behaviors, characteristics, and past experiences”
rejecting state’s argument that the defen- dant may have had strategic reason not to object, where “[t]he state’s speculation aside, there is nothing in the record indicating that defendant made any kind of strategic choice not to object”
rejecting state’s argument that the defendant may have made a strategic choice not to object to admission of evidence on the ground that, “ [t]he state’s speculation aside, there is nothing in the record indicating that defendant made any kind of strategic choice not to object”
“We may consider, under ORAP 5.45(a), unpreserved issues if the error (1) is one of law; (2) is apparent, in that the legal point is obvious, not reasonably in dispute; and (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Muniz, Ortega, Sercombe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

17 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.