Huggett v. Kelly

Under Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or. 604, 523 P.3d 86 (2022), petitioners are eligible for post-conviction relief when their cases were decided by nonunanimous jury verdicts, unless the State raises a procedural defense.

Petitioner appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief after he was convicted of two different assault charges by nonunanimous jury verdicts. Petitioner assigned error to the lower court’s denial of his post-conviction relief petition. Petitioner argued that his petition should have been granted because Ramos v Louisiana 140 S. Ct. 1390 (2020) held that nonunanimous juries were unconstitutional. In response, the State argued that Ramos only applied to cases that had not been finalized before the Ramos decision. Under Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or. 604, 523 P.3d 86 (2022), petitioners are eligible for post-conviction relief when their cases were decided by nonunanimous jury verdicts, unless the State raises a procedural defense. The Court reasoned that because this case was similar to Watkins and the State did not raise procedural defenses, Petitioner was eligible for post-conviction relief. Reversed.