STATE v. BUTTS (2022)

Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of coercion (Count 1) and harassment (Count 4). The jury's verdict was unanimous as to the harassment count, but their verdict was not unanimous as to the coercion count. Defendant argues on appeal that he is entitled to reversal of both convictions because the trial court erred in instructing the jury, over his objection, that it could return nonunanimous verdicts. The state concedes that the trial court erred by accepting the nonunanimous verdict, because that verdict violated the federal constitution's unanimity requirement as set forth in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020). We agree with and accept the state's concession as to Count 1. Defendant also argues that the error entitled him to reversal of his conviction on Count 4. We reject that argument in light of State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 478 P.3d 515 (2020) (nonunanimous jury instruction was not structural error and was harmless with respect to unanimous verdict). To the extent that defendant makes additional arguments in his pro se supplemental brief, we reject those arguments without discussion.

Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

PER CURIAM