State v. Ferguson, 247 Or. App. 747

Ferguson, 28, met the 19-year-old victim through a mutual friend and socialized with her over about one month.
On the evening of the incident, the victim drank tequila at her home and became extremely intoxicated and ill.
The victim passed out on her bed; Ferguson remained, helped her in the bathroom, and later kissed her while she was unconscious.
The next morning the victim awoke to find Ferguson naked beside her; she reported rape to her father and a family friend, Hansen, who contacted police.
An emergency examination showed no physical injuries, which was deemed normal under the circumstances; the victim later testified she believed she was raped and did not consent.
A jury convicted Ferguson of first-degree rape, second-degree sexual abuse, and furnishing alcohol to a minor; on appeal, admission of the victim’s father’s testimony was challenged as improper vouching.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the father’s testimony was improper vouching	Ferguson argues the father’s statements commented on credibility.	State contends testimony showed motive behind reporting and not direct credibility,” and that any error was harmless.	Erred; testimony was improper vouching and the judgment is reversed and remanded.

State v. Middleton, 294 Or. 427 (1983) (no opinion on witness credibility; credibility inferences prohibited)
State v. Milbradt, 305 Or. 621 (1988) (credibility assessments are for the trier of fact)
State v. Keller, 315 Or. 273 (1993) (witness credibility cannot be testified to directly)
State v. Lupoli, 348 Or. 346 (2010) (diagnosis based on credibility amounts to impermissible vouching)
State v. Bainbridge, 238 Or. App. 56 (2010) (discussion of Lupoli on vouching in a different context)
State v. Vargas-Samado, 223 Or. App. 15 (2008) (proximate case involving vouching by a parent for victim's truthfulness)
Easter v. Mills, 239 Or. App. 209 (2010) (admissibility of testimony about motive to lie permissible in some contexts)
State v. Maiden, 222 Or. App. 9 (2008) (harmless error standard for erroneously admitted evidence)
State v. Davis, 336 Or. 19 (2003) (focus on influence of erroneous evidence on verdict)