From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Banks

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
Feb 10, 2021
309 Or. App. 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2021)

Opinion

A170706

02-10-2021

STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. David Lee BANKS, Defendant-Appellant.

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Rond Chananudech, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Patricia G. Rincon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.


Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Rond Chananudech, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Patricia G. Rincon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge.

PER CURIAM

Defendant was found guilty upon jury verdict on one count of assault in the second degree, in violation of ORS 163.175. The jury was instructed that it need not be unanimous, but notwithstanding such instruction the jury's verdict was determined to be unanimous upon polling by the trial court. On appeal, defendant assigns error to the court's imposition of an upward departure sentence and to the nonunanimous jury instruction. We reject without discussion the argument concerning the upward departure sentence.

Defendant contends that in light of the United States Supreme Court ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana , 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed.2d 583 (2020), the judgment on the jury verdict must be reversed as either structural error or plain error. For the reasons the Oregon Supreme Court explained in State v. Flores Ramos , 367 Or. 292, 319, 478 P.3d 515 (2020), we reject the argument that the nonunanimous jury instruction constitutes structural error. As the Oregon Supreme Court has determined that, when a jury returns a unanimous verdict despite a nonunanimous instruction, such error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, we must decline to exercise our discretion to review for plain error. See Flores Ramos , 367 Or. at 320-33, 478 P.3d 515.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Banks

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
Feb 10, 2021
309 Or. App. 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2021)
Case details for

State v. Banks

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DAVID LEE BANKS…

Court:COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

Date published: Feb 10, 2021

Citations

309 Or. App. 344 (Or. Ct. App. 2021)
481 P.3d 435