2017 ORS 40.585¹
Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury

When the admissibility of other evidence of contents of writings, recordings or photographs under ORS 40.550 (Rule 1001. Definitions for ORS 40.550 to 40.585) to 40.585 (Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury) depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the question whether the condition has been fulfilled is ordinarily for the court to determine in accordance with ORS 40.030 (Rule 104. Preliminary questions). However, the issue is for the trier of fact to determine as in the case of other issues of fact when the issue raised is:

(1) Whether the asserted writing ever existed;

(2) Whether another writing, recording or photograph produced at the trial is the original; or

(3) Whether the other evidence of contents correctly reflects the contents. [1981 c.892 §78]

_______________

(Rule 1008)

Law Review Cita­tions

19 WLR 446 (1983)

§§ 40.550 (Rule 1001. Definitions for ORS 40.550 to 40.585) to 40.585 (Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury)

Notes of Decisions

Where testimony by appellant and appellant’s son clearly and convincingly es­tab­lishes that appellant had been involuntarily committed twice in past three years, original commit­ment order is not re­quired by “best evidence rule.” State v. Brungard, 101 Or App 67, 789 P2d 683 (1990), as modified by 102 Or App 509, 789 P2d 683 (1990)

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.