STATE v. SCHAEFER (2021)

Defendant was found guilty by jury verdict of one count of unauthorized use of a vehicle, in violation of ORS 164.135. On appeal, in two assignments of error, defendant asserts that the trial court erred by (1) denying a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the state's case-in-chief and (2) providing jury instructions allowing a nonunanimous verdict. We reject without discussion the first assignment of error.

In his second assignment, defendant asserts that the jury instruction for a nonunanimous verdict constituted a structural error. Subsequent to the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020), the Oregon Supreme Court explained that nonunanimous jury instruction was not a structural error that categorically requires reversal. State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 319, 478 P.3d 515 (2020). Additionally, when, as here, the jury's verdict is unanimous despite the nonunanimous instruction, the Oregon Supreme Court has determined that the erroneous instruction is “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Ciraulo, 367 Or. 350, 354, 478 P.3d 502 (2020). Therefore, we reject defendant's second assignment of error.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM