State v. Lowell, 249 Or. App. 364

Defendant Lowell, age 23, was charged with third-degree rape of a 14-year-old complainant under ORS 163.355.
Jury trial resulted in a conviction for third-degree rape.
Detective Staples testified regarding the complainant and defendant’s statements and the complainant’s demeanor during interviews.
Defendant testified that he did not have sexual intercourse with the complainant.
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for plain-error review of the detective’s credibility comments.
The decision held that the trial court plainly erred by admitting the detective’s comments on credibility and exercised discretion to correct the error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the detective’s credibility comments were plain error	Lowell argues the detective’s statements commented on credibility.	Lowell contends these were improper vouching or credibility assessments.	Yes, plain error found; admission reversed and remanded.
Whether the court should exercise plain-error review	Lowell urges correction under ORAP 5.45(1) due to plain error.	State argues discretionary review should be declined.	Discretion exercised to correct error; reversal remand affirmed.

State v. Lupoli, 348 Or. 346 (2010) (witness cannot testify about another’s credibility; potentially impermissible testimony)
State v. Milbradt, 305 Or. 621 (1988) (trial court should sua sponte cut off credibility evidence; plain error caution)
State v. McQuisten, 97 Or.App. 517 (1989) (trial court duty to prevent credibility testimony; plain error context)
State v. Gornick, 340 Or. 160 (2006) (competing inferences about strategic objection not persuasive for plain error)
State v. Gonzales, 241 Or.App. 353 (2011) (plain-error review in Lupoli context)