State v. Brown
241 Or. App. 226
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- Brown was charged with two counts of first-degree sexual abuse (ORS 163.427) and one count of second-degree unlawful sexual penetration (ORS 163.408).
- Dr. Janey Purvis testified, over defense objection, that it was highly likely the victim experienced sexual abuse.
- Under Southard, the court admitted Purvis's diagnosis despite lacking diagnostic physical findings.
- Brown contested the conduct but claimed he was guilty but insane or that his alter personality Josh committed the acts.
- The jury convicted Brown on all counts; the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, finding the Purvis diagnosis not harmless under Davis.
- The decision centers on whether the diagnostic testimony went to the heart of the state's case and thus was reversible error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether admission of the sexual-abuse diagnosis was reversible error. | State argues the error was harmless. | Brown argues the diagnosis went to a central issue and affected the verdict. | Not harmless; reversed and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Davis, 336 Or. 19 (2003) (establishes single 'little likelihood' test for harmless error under Article VII)
- State v. Southard, 347 Or. 127 (2009) (admissibility of expert diagnosis; danger of prejudice from expert testimony)
- Sanchez-Alfonso, 238 Or.App. 160 (2010) (harmless error where physical abuse evidence is undisputed or not central)
- Perkins, 221 Or.App. 136 (2008) (admissibility and harmlessness considerations under Davis framework)