State v. Martinez-Sanchez, 244 Or. App. 87

Defendant was convicted by jury of three counts of first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual abuse.
Appeals challenged admission of a medical expert's diagnosis of sexual abuse without supporting physical evidence.
Liberty House, a child abuse assessment center, provided the diagnosis evidence.
Defense theory suggested the abuse allegations could be fabricated in a custody dispute; defense argued diagnosis should not be admitted.
State did not initially plan to elicit a diagnosis and did not challenge the direct examination on that point; defense on cross-examination opened the door to the diagnosis.
Trial court admitted the diagnosis after the defense questions, and the court of appeals declined to exercise discretion to correct the error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admission of the diagnosis was plain error	State	Martinez-Sanchez	Not affirmatively corrected; not exercised discretion to correct
Whether defendant opened the door to diagnosis evidence	State	Martinez-Sanchez	State failed to preserve error; defendant's cross-examination opened the door

State v. Southard, 347 Or. 127 (Or. 2009) (admission of expert diagnosis in absence of physical evidence can be plain error)
State v. Clay, 235 Or. App. 26 (Or. App. 2010) (plain error when expert diagnosis admitted in absence of physical evidence)
State v. Lovern, 234 Or. App. 502 (Or. App. 2010) (analysis of plain-error discretion in admission of expert testimony)
State v. Merrimon, 234 Or. App. 515 (Or. App. 2010) (extension of plain-error review in trial evidence)
State v. Miranda, 309 Or. 121 (Or. 1990) (door-opening rule for cross-examination)
Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or. 376 (Or. 1991) (discretion to correct plain error considering competing factors)