261 P.3d 55
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- Phillips was convicted of fourth-degree assault and DUII after a video-recorded altercation in the Intoxilyzer room at Hillsboro PD between Kaufman and Phillips; Cook, the arresting officer, observed intoxication and later testified, while Kaufman did not testify; the video had no sound and showed the altercation but not Cook’s direct participation; defense sought to admit the video and photos to impeach Cook’s bias under OEC 609-1; the trial court excluded the tape and photographs as inflammatory; the State argued the evidence had no reliable bias relevance and would inflame the jury; the appellate court affirms the trial court’s denial and Phillips’s convictions; the question on appeal is whether the evidence could be admitted to show bias under OEC 609-1 and Hubbard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the video evidence could be admitted to show Cook’s bias under OEC 609-1. | Video demonstrates Cook’s potential bias due to events in the DUII room. | Video is not tied to Cook’s bias; it would be inflammatory and lacks proper bias relevance. | No; not admissible to show bias; initial threshold not met. |
| Whether Hubbard governs initial bias showing and allows admission of bias evidence here. | Hubbard supports admitting bias evidence when bias is shown. | Kaufman’s conduct, not Cook’s, is what would show bias; Cook did not participate. | Hubbard’s initial-showing requirement not satisfied; evidence excluded. |
| Whether trial court abused discretion in excluding tape/photographs given potential bias impact. | Exclusion prevents defense from challenging credibility via bias evidence. | Exclusion avoids inflaming the jury and preserves focus on relevant facts. | No reversible error; discretion exercised within Hubbard framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hubbard v. State, 297 Or. 789 (1984) (bias impeachment requires initial showing; exclusion may be proper if no initial showing)
- Muldrew v. State, 210 P.3d 936 (2009) (admissibility where bias evidence relates to officer actions/roles)
- Tyon v. State, 204 P.3d 106 (2009) (bias evidence admissibility in officer-related contexts)
- Shelly v. State, 157 P.3d 234 (2007) (biasEvidence admissibility when relevant to credibility)
- Harberts v. State, 108 P.3d 1201 (2005) (limits on relevance of bias evidence; inference-based reasoning)
- Haugen v. State, 243 P.3d 31 (2010) (trial court discretion after initial bias shown; inapplicable where initial showing missing)
- Brown v. State, 699 P.2d 1122 (1985) (limitations of bias-impeachment under evidentiary rules)