Court Opinion

ID: 9561549
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:11:38.454163+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:54.653146
License: Public Domain

DURHAM, J.,
concurring.
I agree with the majority’s decision to reverse defendant’s convictions and remand the case for a new trial. I write separately, because I do not agree with all of the majority’s reasoning.
The issue is whether the trial court committed error in the manner assigned by defendant and, if so, whether any error is harmful and requires a new trial. The court correctly concludes that the trial court’s decision to admit extensive hearsay testimony about M’s out-of-court statements was a reversible error that affected the verdict as to charges involving M, L, and L2. That conclusion fully answers the issue on appeal.
Despite that fact, the majority opinion goes on to analyze whether harmless error resulted from the court’s deprivation of defendant’s confrontation rights with respect to L2. The majority concludes that the court committed only a harmless error in that respect. 323 Or at 609-12. The majority does not explain why that discussion is necessary or even relevant to its conclusion that the error regarding admission of M’s hearsay statements necessitates a new trial as to all *617charges. I can conceive of no legitimate reason connected to the majority’s rationale in this case why that discussion appears in the majority opinion. Because that discussion contributes nothing to the reasoning of the majority opinion, it is dictum. I do not join in that discussion.
For the reason expressed above, I concur in the result reached by the majority.