304 ORAPP 860 - State v. Worley

                               860

        Submitted May 8, reversed and remanded June 17, 2020


                 STATE OF OREGON,
                  Plaintiff-Respondent,
                            v.
              JAMES DANIEL WORLEY,
                  Defendant-Appellant.
             Deschutes County Circuit Court
                  14FE1644; A167772

464 P3d 1152



  Beth M. Bagley, Judge.
  Ryan Scott filed the briefs for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Christopher A. Perdue, Assistant
Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Kamins, Judge,
and Landau, Senior Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Reversed and remanded.
Cite as

304 Or App 860

 (2020)                              861

        PER CURIAM
         Defendant was found guilty by a nonunanimous jury
of six counts of first-degree sexual abuse (the six guilty verdicts merged for a total of three convictions), ORS 163.427,
and one count of attempted first-degree sodomy, ORS
163.405. Defendant argues that the trial court’s acceptance
of nonunanimous verdicts constitutes plain error under the
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In
Ramos v. Louisiana,

590 US ___

140 S Ct 1390

206 L Ed 2d 583

 (2020), the Court concluded that nonunanimous jury
verdicts violated the Sixth Amendment. In State v. Ulery,

366 Or 500, 504

464 P3d 1123

 (2020), the Oregon Supreme
Court concluded that a trial court’s acceptance of a nonunanimous verdict constituted plain error and exercised discretion to correct that error in light of the gravity of the error
and because failure to raise the issue in the trial court did
not weigh heavily against correction as the trial court would
not have been able to correct the error under controlling law.
         The state concedes that the trial court’s acceptance
of nonunanimous verdicts in this case constitutes plain
error. For the reasons set forth in Ulery, we exercise our discretion to correct the error in this case. Our disposition obviates the need to address defendant’s remaining arguments.
        Reversed and remanded.