State v. Tallman

310 Or.App. 576

484 P.3d 1132 (Mem)

STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.Emily TALLMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

A170902

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Submitted March 9, 2021.

April 7, 2021

Lindsey Burrows and O'Connor Weber LLC filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jonathan N. Schildt, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Mooney, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of fourteen counts of first-degree theft, ORS 164.055, and seven counts of aggravated first-degree theft, ORS 164.057.¹ The convictions on Counts 1 through 6 and Count 12 were by nonunanimous jury verdict. Defendant appeals the judgment of conviction, raising three assignments of error. We reject her first assignment without discussion. In her second and third assignments of error, she contends that the trial court erred under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution by instructing the jury that it could return nonunanimous guilty verdicts and by receiving nonunanimous verdicts. Defendant asks us to reverse the judgment and remand for a new trial as to Counts 1 through 6 and Count 12.

In Ramos v. Louisiana , 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020), the United States Supreme Court concluded that nonunanimous jury verdicts violated the Sixth Amendment. The state concedes that because the convictions on Counts 1 through 6 and Count 12 were not the result of unanimous verdicts, those convictions should be reversed. We agree and accept the state's concession.

...