2017 ORS 40.172¹
Rule 404-1. Pattern, practice or history of abuse
  • • expert testimony

(1) In any proceeding, any party may introduce evidence establishing a pattern, practice or history of abuse of a person and may introduce expert testimony to assist the fact finder in understanding the significance of such evidence if the evidence:

(a) Is relevant to any material issue in the proceeding; and

(b) Is not inadmissible under any other provision of law including, but not limited to, rules regarding relevance, privilege, hearsay, competency and authentication.

(2) This section may not be construed to limit any evidence that would otherwise be admissible under the Oregon Evidence Code or any other provision of law.

(3) As used in this section, “abuse” has the meaning given that term in ORS 107.705 (Definitions for ORS 107.700 to 107.735). [1997 c.397 §2]

Note: 40.172 (Rule 404-1. Pattern, practice or history of abuse) was added to and made a part of 40.010 (Rule 100. Short title) to 40.585 (Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury) by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Chapter 40

(Generally)

Notes of Decisions

General rule is that polygraph evidence is inadmissible in pro­ceed­ing governed by Oregon Evidence Code. State v. Brown, 297 Or 404, 687 P2d 751 (1984)

Party could introduce results of polygraph test taken by spouse for purpose of showing that response of party upon learning polygraph results was reasonable. Fromdahl and Fromdahl, 314 Or 496, 840 P2d 683 (1992)

Where state law completely precludes reliable, ma­te­ri­ally exculpatory evidence, exclusion of that evidence violates Due Process Clauses of United States Constitu­tion. State v. Cazares-Mendez, 233 Or App 310, 227 P3d 172 (2010), aff’d State v. Cazares-Mendez/Reyes-Sanchez, 350 Or 491, 256 P3d 104 (2011)

Oregon Evidence Code articulates min­i­mum standards of reliability that apply to many types of evidence for admissibility, including eyewitness identifica­tion evidence, and parties must employ code to address admissibility of eyewitness testimony. State v. Lawson/James, 352 Or 724, 291 P3d 673 (2012)

Law Review Cita­tions

59 OLR 43 (1980); 19 WLR 343 (1983)

Chapter 40

Evidence Code

Annota­tions are listed under the heading “Under former similar statute” if they predate the adop­tion of the Evidence Code, which went into effect January 1, 1982.

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 40—Evidence Code, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors040.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 40, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano040.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.