State v. Newton

"[A]s to unanimous verdicts, a trial court’s nonunanimous jury instruction [does] not amount to structural error and [is] harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 319, 334, 478 P.3d 515 (2020).

Defendant was convicted unanimously for felony strangulation, but not for strangulation constituting domestic violence. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s decision to instruct the jury that it could return a nonunanimous verdict that would be accepted by the court. In response, the State conceded that the trial court did err in accepting the jury’s nonunanimous verdict for the question of whether the Defendant and victim were household or family members, but argued that the trial court should have reversed and remand only the question of domestic violence rather than on the count for strangulation. The State further argued that the Court should also affirm Defendant’s conviction for strangulation. "[A]s to unanimous verdicts, a trial court’s nonunanimous jury instruction [does] not amount to structural error and [is] harmless beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 319, 334, 478 P.3d 515 (2020). The Court held that the trial court correctly entered a judgment of conviction for felony strangulation. The Court reasoned that, even though the jurors were not unanimous for one of two questions needed to prove domestic violence, the jury ultimately did not find the Defendant guilty of the additional element. Affirmed.