Hernandez-Hernandez v. Hill

MEMORANDUM *

The prosecution’s final question to its expert witness did not inquire about the *951typicality of recantations as permitted by state law. See State v. Middleton, 294 Or. 427, 438, 657 P.2d 1215 (1983). Instead, by alleging that the recantation surfaced because the appellant was “at large,” the prosecution impermissibly vouched for the victim’s subsequent disavowal of her recantation. See id. Defense counsel’s failure to object to this question fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

H…