State v. Johnson

                                   370

 Submitted November 12, 2020, affirmed March 31, petition for review denied
                        July 29, 2021 (

)


                     STATE OF OREGON,
                      Plaintiff-Respondent,
                                v.
                  COREY LEWIS JOHNSON,
                 aka Corey Johnson-Fleishman,
                   aka Corey Louis Johnson,
                     Defendant-Appellant.
                Multnomah County Circuit Court
                     18CR23703; A170179
                                

   David F. Rees, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Erin J. Snyder Severe, Deputy Public Defender,
Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Christopher Page, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and
Kamins, Judge.
   PER CURIAM
   Affirmed.
Cite as 

 (2021)                            371

        PER CURIAM
         A jury unanimously found defendant guilty of firstdegree possession of a forged instrument, ORS 165.022.
On appeal, defendant asserts that the trial court erred by
(1) denying a motion to suppress evidence obtained from an
unlawful seizure and (2) providing jury instructions allowing nonunanimous verdicts. We reject the first contention
without written discussion.
         As for the second, defendant argues that instructing
the jury that it could return a nonunanimous verdict constituted a structural error requiring reversal. Subsequent
to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Ramos v.
Louisiana, 

, 

, 

(2020), the Oregon Supreme Court explained that the delivery of a nonunanimous jury instruction was not a structural
error that categorically requires reversal. State v. Flores
Ramos, 

, 

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

, 

 (2020). Therefore, we reject defendant’s second assignment of error.
        Affirmed.