Court Opinion

ID: 9606797
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:52:41.774654+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:06:44.863034
License: Public Domain

De MUNIZ, J.,
concurring in part, dissenting in part.
In my view, the custodian of the hospital records should have been listed as a witness on the indictment. However, I believe that the reasoning in State v. Stout, 305 Or 34, 749 P2d 1174 (1988), mandates the majority’s conclusion that the trial court’s order excluding evidence beyond that of the testimony of the custodian is unlawful and should be *261reversed. On the cross-appeal, I would reverse for the reasons stated by Judge Warren in his separate opinion.
Durham, J., joins in this opinion.