State v. Ciraulo

“[I]nstructing the jury that it could return a non-unanimous guilty verdict [is] not structural error [w]here a jury poll reveals that the jury unanimously found the defendant guilty of the charged offense[s], the nonunanimous jury instruction [can] be held harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 319-20 (2020).

• Defendant appealed a conviction for forgery in the first degree, possession of a forged instrument, and theft in the third degree. On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial court erred in issuing the non-unanimous jury instruction. Defendant asserted that under Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US __, 140 S Ct 1390 (2020), all of his convictions should be reversed due to the structural error of the non-unanimous jury instruction. In the alternative, Defendant argued that a jury poll is not sufficient to “establish that the jury instruction was harmless” error. State v. Ciraulo, 367 Or 350, 353 (2020). In response, the State argued the error was harmless because each conviction was based on the jury’s unanimous verdict, as shown on the jury verdict forms. “[I]nstructing the jury that it could return a non-unanimous guilty verdict [is] not structural error [w]here a jury poll reveals that the jury unanimously found the defendant guilty of the charged offense[s], the nonunanimous jury instruction [can] be held harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 319-20 (2020). The Court found that the record contained sufficient evidence to conclude that the verdict was unanimous. Thus, the Court held that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Affirmed