Summary
explaining that "the trial court's decision to admit the evidence to show sexual purpose—even if different from how this court might ultimately have resolved the balancing question in the first instance—represents a permissible exercise of the court's discretion under the totality of the circumstances in this case"
Summary of this case from State v. PowersOpinion
A161140, (S067699)
06-04-2020
STATE v. MOLES, David Alan
Petition for review allowed in part, limited to the issue of the appropriate disposition of this case in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, ___ U.S. ___, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020); petition for review otherwise denied. For substantially the reasons given in State v. Williams, 366 Or. 495, 466 P.3d 55 (2020), the court waives the rules of appellate procedure to consider defendant's assignment of error, accepts the state's concession that defendant's Sixth Amendment challenge to his convictions qualifies for plain error review, and exercises its discretion to correct the error. The court therefore reverses defendant's convictions on Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9. Decision of Court of Appeals reversed in part, judgment of circuit court reversed, and case remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.
Review Allowed.