State v. Garrett
248 P.3d 965
| Or. | 2011Background
- Williams (1988) murdered in her Portland home; evidence showed no forced entry and no robbery or missing items; victim was a marijuana dealer, with DNA suggesting multiple attackers.
- Moore (1990) assaulted by Garrett with a dumbbell, purse stolen, Moore identified Garrett; Garrett convicted of attempted murder, first-degree assault, first-degree robbery, and first-degree burglary.
- DNA testing in 2002 linked knife incident to Williams case to a rapist in Texas; lamp cord DNA matched Garrett, prompting reinterview.
- Garrett was charged with Williams homicide and moved to exclude Moore-crimes evidence; trial court granted the motion as improper character evidence under OEC 404(3) or 403.
- State appealed directly to Oregon Supreme Court under ORS 138.060(2) seeking reversal; court affirmed trial court's exclusion of Moore-crimes evidence.
- Court analyzed relevance under OEC 404(3) using Johns six-factor test and concluded Moore evidence was not probative of intent/motive for Williams case and was unduly prejudicial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Moore crimes evidence is admissible to prove intent in Williams homicide | State: evidence shows motive/intent to burglarize/rob Williams | Garrett: evidence lacks relevance to Williams and is prejudicial | No; not relevant for noncharacter purposes (intent) and unduly prejudicial |
| Whether Moore crimes evidence is admissible to prove motive | State: supports theory of burglary/robbery motive | Garrett: no logical linkage to Williams burglary/robbery | No; lacks logical relevance to motive; no burglary/robbery proven in Williams case |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johns, 301 Or. 535 (1986) (OEC 404(3) is inclusionary for noncharacter purposes)
- State v. Pratt, 309 Or. 205 (1990) (test for determining admissibility of other-crimes evidence for intent)
- State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189 (1992) (six-question framework for noncharacter probative value)
- State v. Hampton, 317 Or. 251 (1993) (parole-status evidence as motive evidence under Johnson framework)
- State v. Walker, 244 Or. 404 (1966) (motive definition; foundational concept for relevance)