Categories: Oregon Court of Appeals Opinions

STATE v. STRINGHAM, 242 Or. App. 70 (2011)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JIMMY RAY STRINGHAM, Defendant-Appellant.

08121877C; A143575.Oregon Court of Appeals.Submitted February 4, 2011.
April 6, 2011.

Appeal from the Malheur County Circuit Court, J. Burdette Pratt, Judge.

Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Ryan T. O’Connor, Senior Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Matthew J. Lysne, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Schuman, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Nakamoto, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded.

Page 71

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in admitting an expert’s diagnosis that the victim was sexually abused. The state concedes that the trial court erred in admitting the expert’s diagnosis over defendant’s objection, because the diagnosis was based purely on the victim’s credibility and therefore amounted to impermissible vouching. State v. Lupoli, 348 Or 346, 361-62, 234 P3d 117 (2010); State v. Bainbridge, 238 Or App 56, 59, 241 P3d 1186 (2010). We agree with the state’s concession. Accordingly, we reverse defendant’s convictions and remand for a new trial.[1]

Reversed and remanded.

[1] Defendant also argues that the court erred in instructing the jury. Given our disposition, we need not reach those assignments of error.

Page 72

jdjungle