State v. Myers

                                   160

  Submitted August 10, 2020, affirmed March 17, petition for review denied
                       August 26, 2021 (

)


                     STATE OF OREGON,
                      Plaintiff-Respondent,
                                v.
                  SEAN GEOFFREY MYERS,
                      Defendant-Appellant.
                  Jackson County Circuit Court
                      15CR39050; A168810
                               

  Lisa C. Greif, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Neil F. Byl, Deputy Public Defender, Office of
Public Defense Services, filed the opening brief for appellant. Sean Geoffrey Myers filed the supplemental brief
pro se.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Susan G. Howe, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge,
and Aoyagi, Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Affirmed.
Cite as 

 (2021)                             161

        PER CURIAM
         Defendant was found guilty by unanimous jury verdict of multiple felonies and a misdemeanor stemming from
a sexual assault of his estranged wife. On appeal, defendant
claims that the trial court erred by denying the motions
for judgment of acquittal for various counts, admitting evidence that should have been suppressed, and providing jury
instructions allowing nonunanimous verdicts. Defendant
also makes numerous pro se assignments of error related to
admission of evidence from a mobile phone, misconduct by
law enforcement officers and prosecutors, and insufficiency
of the evidence to support a conviction. We reject without
written discussion all of the assignments of error except
that related to the nonunanimous jury instruction.
         With respect to the nonunanimous jury instruction,
defendant asserts that instructing the jury that it could
return nonunanimous verdicts constituted a structural
error requiring reversal. After the United States Supreme
Court ruled, in Ramos v. Louisiana, 

, 

, 

 (2020), that nonunanimous jury verdicts for serious offenses violate the Sixth Amendment, the
Oregon Supreme Court explained that, although giving the
nonunanimous jury instruction was error, it was not a structural error that categorically requires reversal in every
case. State v. Flores Ramos, 

, 

(2020). Additionally, when, as here, the jury’s verdict was
unanimous despite the nonunanimous instruction, such
erroneous instruction was “harmless beyond a reasonable
doubt.” State v. Ciraulo, 

, 

 (2020).
Therefore, we reject defendant’s arguments concerning the
nonunanimous jury instruction.
        Affirmed.