Opinion
A184122
10-30-2024
STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CRESENCIO GARCIA-ROCIO, Defendant-Appellant.
Frances J. Gray fled the brief for appellant. Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted September 13, 2024
Washington County Circuit Court C122303CR Rebecca D. Guptill, Judge.
Frances J. Gray fled the brief for appellant.
Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
EGAN, J.
Defendant appeals an amended judgment of conviction. Defendant's appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or. 434, 814 P.2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or.App. 563, 484 P.3d 1098 (2021) (deciding matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v. Nooth, 254 Or.App. 402, 295 P.3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or. 747 (2013) (same).
After a jury trial in 2013, defendant was found guilty of multiple sex crimes, but the verdicts on many of the counts were nonunanimous. In Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), the United States Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that a jury reach a unanimous guilty verdict to convict a defendant of a crime.
Pursuant to Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or. 604, 607, 523 P.3d 86 (2022), which held that Ramos applies retroactively, the post-conviction court entered a stipulated general judgment vacating the convictions that were based on nonunanimous verdicts. On remand, the trial court entered a judgment of conviction for three counts of first-degree sexual abuse. The trial court sentenced defendant to 180 months in prison and 10 years of post-prison supervision. The trial court subsequently amended the judgment to clarify that defendant would receive credit for time served.
Having reviewed the record, including the trial court file, the post-conviction court file, the transcript of the hearings, and the Balfour brief, we have identified no arguably meritorious issues.
Affirmed.