State v. Verardo

Defendant appeals his conviction for second-degree robbery, arguing that the trial court erred when it ruled that the state could introduce evidence of his prior convictions in order to impeach him.1 As explained below, we conclude that the court did not err; evidence of the convictions was admissible to impeach defendant as a hearsay declar-ant under OEC 609 (providing for impeachment by certain prior convictions) and OEC 806 (providing for impeachment of hearsay declarants).2 Therefore, we affirm.

Defendant was charged with robbing a Walgreens pharmacy. In its case-in-chief, the state called…