Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 8 OES 136.643 provides, in relevant part: “In the trial of * * * a person accused or charged with the commission of a crime, the person so charged or accused shall, at the own request of the person, but not otherwise, be deemed a competent witness!.] * * * The defendant or accused, when offering testimony as a witness in the own behalf of the defendant, gives the prosecution a right to cross-examination upon all facts to which the defendant or accused has testified and which tend to the conviction or acquittal of the defendant or accused.” 9 In Lotches, the court noted that, in addition to the federal constitution, Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution gives criminal defendants a right to testify in their own behalf. 331 Or at 483 n 10. But see Rogers, 330 Or at 298-99 (<HOLDING>). 10 State v. Mai, 294 Or 269, 656 P2d 315 
 Holding statements: (A) recognizing that criminal defendants right to testify is subject to crossexamination (B) holding violation of right to testify could not be harmless (C) holding that right to be heard in article i section 11 incorporates framers contemporaneous understanding which did not recognize criminal defendants right to testify (D) recognizing that a defendants right to be heard in criminal proceedings prior to sentencing is constitutionally protected (E) holding right to testify was federal constitutional right
Output (English): holding violation of right to testify could not be harmless