Logan v. State, 313 P.3d 1128

Petitioner was convicted of multiple counts of first-degree sexual abuse and endangering a minor after his daughter C reported sexual touching; CARES Northwest performed an evaluation and staff made treatment recommendations.
At trial, CARES social worker Findley testified that CARES recommended (1) no further direct contact between C and petitioner, (2) petitioner receive a full psychological and sex-offender evaluation, and (3) that the other child N’s safety be evaluated; defense counsel did not object.
The jury convicted petitioner; his direct appeal affirmed. Petitioner then filed a post-conviction claim asserting ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to object to Findley’s testimony.
The post-conviction court granted relief, concluding the recommendations impermissibly vouched for C’s credibility and that counsel’s failure to object was prejudicial.
On appeal, the state argued an objection would have failed under controlling precedent (notably State v. Wilson) and that counsel’s approach was strategic; the appellate court reversed, holding the testimony was admissible under Wilson and petitioner failed to prove prejudice.

Issue	Logan's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to object to Findley’s testimony about CARES treatment recommendations	The recommendations vouched for C’s allegations and thus counsel should have objected; failure was deficient and prejudicial	A reasonable lawyer could decline to object because the recommendations were admissible under prevailing law (Wilson); omission was strategic and nonprejudicial	Reversed post-conviction relief: counsel’s failure to object did not prejudice petitioner because Findley’s recommendations were admissible under Wilson and would not have supported a winning objection

State v. Middleton, 294 Or 427 (distinguishes impermissible vouching from admissible evidence that merely bolsters credibility)
State v. Milbradt, 305 Or 621 (expert statements that a witness is not deceptive constitute improper vouching)
State v. Keller, 315 Or 273 (CARES testimony that directly endorses a child’s credibility is impermissible vouching)
State v. Wilson, 121 Or App 460 (diagnosis of sexual abuse by CARES doctor admissible and not a direct comment on credibility)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes federal ineffective-assistance standard)
State v. Southard, 347 Or 127 (later Supreme Court decision affecting admissibility of diagnosis/treatment evidence; not controlling at time of trial)