Legal Opinion

State v. HREN

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 6, 2010No. 071153442; A138713PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Defendant appeals her conviction for second-degree theft, ORS 164.045. She assigns error to the exclusion of her testimony that she had been told by a Macy’s employee that she could take the item that she was charged with stealing: a bottle of perfume used by customers as a “tester” bottle. The state concedes that the trial court erred in excluding the testimony but argues that the exclusion was harmless because there was little likelihood that the excluded evidence would have affected the jury’s verdict. We disagree with the state’s harmless error argument and, accordingly, reverse and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. PerkinsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. Schiller-MunnemanOregon Supreme Court · 2016
  2. State v. RamirezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  3. State v. Zaldana-MendozaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  4. State v. LaskyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  5. State v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API