State v. Roberts, 570 P.3d 279

Defendant Danny Joe Roberts was convicted of two counts of first-degree sodomy and two counts of first-degree sexual abuse in Washington County, Oregon.
The case stemmed from allegations by Roberts' granddaughter, K, of sexual abuse occurring from kindergarten through third or fourth grade, initially disclosed to a therapist and subsequently to authorities.
At trial, the state called several witnesses, including K, her parents, and her friend D, while the defendant testified in his own defense and denied the allegations.
On appeal, Roberts challenged (1) a prosecutorial remark during rebuttal closing arguments that he contended was an improper attack on defense counsel, and (2) the admission of a friend's testimony about a nightmare K had allegedly related to the abuse.
The trial court overruled objections on both issues, denying a motion for mistrial regarding the closing argument and admitting the friend's testimony over defense objection.
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, finding prejudicial error regarding the nightmare testimony but not the prosecutorial comment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Prosecutor's remark ("fudged" in closing)	Comment addressed defense's misuse of "inconsistent" statements	Remark was an improper personal attack denying right to fair trial	Remark was improper but not prejudicial; no mistrial warranted
Admission of testimony about K's nightmare	Testimony was relevant to show K's trauma supports allegations	Testimony was irrelevant, unduly prejudicial, and inadmissible hearsay	Testimony was irrelevant, should have been excluded; reversible

State v. Rosenbohm, 237 Or App 646 (Or. Ct. App. 2010) (outlines standards for improper closing argument and prejudice)
State v. Lundbom, 96 Or App 458 (Or. Ct. App. 1989) (reversible error for improper personal attacks by prosecutor in argument)
State v. Presley, 108 Or App 149 (Or. Ct. App. 1991) (error to admit child's dream-related statements without evidentiary nexus)
State v. Turnidge, 359 Or 364 (Or. 2016) (relevance requires rational relationship to issues in the case)
State v. Bement, 363 Or 760 (Or. 2018) (harmless error standard focuses on likelihood to affect verdict)