State v. Basua

Defendant appeals his conviction for two counts of second-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.425,1 asserting evi-dentiary error. In his first assignment of error, defendant contends that the court erred by excluding evidence of his character for sexual propriety as allowed by OEC 404(2)(a).2 In his second assignment, defendant argues that the court erred by excluding impeachment evidence. Because we agree with defendant that the court erred by not allowing character evidence of defendant’s sexual propriety, and the error was not harmless, we reverse and remand for a new trial.3

Generally, when…