STATE v. THOMAS IV (2021)

A unanimous jury found defendant guilty of two counts of first-degree forgery, ORS 165.013; and two counts of second-degree theft, ORS 164.045. Defendant also pleaded guilty to one count each of felon in possession of a firearm, ORS 166.270(1), and carrying a concealed weapon, ORS 166.240, but does not challenge his convictions on those counts. On appeal, defendant makes numerous arguments related to evidentiary issues concerning the forgery and theft convictions. We reject each of those arguments without discussion. Defendant also argues that the trial court erred both by providing a jury instruction allowing nonunanimous verdicts and by accepting the verdicts after the erroneous instruction.

While, in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020), providing a nonunanimous jury instruction was erroneous, it does not follow that receiving unanimous verdicts and entering convictions on those verdicts requires reversal as defendant requests. Where, as here, the jury returned unanimous verdicts, as evidenced in this case by a poll, the erroneous jury instruction was rendered “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Ciraulo, 367 Or. 350, 354, 478 P.3d 502 (2020).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM