- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Appellate Procedure
- Date Filed: 12-16-2020
- Case #: A168299
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Ortega, P.J., and Shorr, J., and Powers, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed a conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree. Defendant argued that the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine to preclude the prosecutor from using the word “victim.” Defendant asserted that using the term “victim” during trial constituted impermissible vouching. In response, the State argued the error was harmless because Defendant’s motion sought to exclude permissible uses of the word “victim.” "A trial court’s pretrial ruling is reviewed for abuse of discretion." State v. Pitt, 352 Or 566, 573-74 (2012). The Court found that the trial court was within its discretion to deny Defendant’s motion as it related to the prosecutor’s use of the word “victim.” The Court found that the officer’s reference to K as “victim” one time during his testimony was unlikely to affect the verdict. Thus, the Court held that the trial court’s error was harmless. Affirmed