Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Raymond Merl TURNER, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for three counts of first-degree sodomy (Counts 1 to 3); three counts of first-degree sexual penetration (Counts 4 to 6); and three counts of first-degree sexual abuse (Counts 7 to 9). Although the jury was instructed that it need not reach unanimity to find defendant guilty, it returned unanimous verdicts on all but Counts 2 and 3. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court: (1) abused its discretion under OEC 403 in admitting certain evidence of other sexual misconduct by defendant; (2) erred by instructing the jury that it could convict by a less-than-unanimous verdict; and (3) erred by accepting the nonunanimous verdicts on Counts 2 and 3.
When considered in conjunction with the record and similar cases, including State v. Terry, 309 Or. App. 459, 482 P.3d 105 (2021), and State v. Moles, 295 Or. App. 606, 435 P.3d 782, rev. den., 365 Or. 194, 451 P.3d 242 (2019), rev'd on other grounds, 366 Or. 549, 466 P.3d 61 (2020), the trial court's challenged OEC 403 ruling was not an abuse of discretion.
As for nonunanimity, although the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it could convict by nonunanimous verdicts, that error requires reversal only of the convictions on Counts 2 and 3, the sole counts on which the jury was not unanimous. State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 478 P.3d 515 (2020); State v. Kincheloe, 367 Or. 335, 478 P.3d 507 (2020). The error does not require reversal of the convictions on which the verdicts were unanimous. Id.
Convictions on Counts 2 and 3 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: A171915
Decided: November 17, 2021
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)