State v. Ortiz

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings, holding that the appellate court abused its discretion by reversing solely on the basis that the evidentiary error was not harmless. The Court clarified that plain‑error review requires consideration of the Ailes factors and that harmless‑error analysis alone cannot justify reversal. It also affirmed that most of the officer’s field‑sobriety‑test testimony was admissible without an additional scientific‑evidence foundation.