From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Bass

Oregon Court of Appeals
Nov 14, 1985
708 P.2d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 1985)

Opinion

85-4273; CA A35299

Argued and submitted October 22, 1985.

Affirmed November 14, 1985.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County, Val D. Sloper, Judge.

Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Salem.

Stephen F. Peifer, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Newman, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Defendant appeals his conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree. He contends that the court erred in allowing evidence of the results of a polygraph examination. He concedes that he and his counsel signed a stipulation that the results of the test would be admissible but contends that, because polygraph results are not scientifically reliable, the test results should have been excluded. The evidence was admissible because of the stipulation. State v. Brown, 297 Or. 404, 687 P.2d 751 (1984).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Bass

Oregon Court of Appeals
Nov 14, 1985
708 P.2d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 1985)
Case details for

State v. Bass

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CHESTER STRATHER BASS, JR., Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Nov 14, 1985

Citations

708 P.2d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 1985)
708 P.2d 1207

Citing Cases

State v. Lyon

We decline to do so.See State v. Brown, 297 Or. 404, 445 n 35, 687 P.2d 751 (1984); State v. Bennett, 17 Or.…

State v. LaStair

We have since held that the evidence is admissible. State v. Bass, 76 Or. App. 396, 708 P.2d 1207 (1985).…