Opinion
A162173
02-03-2021
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Anthony Morgan MAILMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Erin J. Snyder Severe, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, for petition.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Erin J. Snyder Severe, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, for petition.
Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and James, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Defendant has petitioned for reconsideration of our opinion in State v. Mailman , 303 Or. App. 101, 463 P.3d 20 (2020). In our original opinion, we neglected to rule on the assignments of error raised in defendant's supplemental brief, wherein defendant challenged the trial court's instruction that the jury could reach a nonunanimous verdict. Defendant filed a petition for reconsideration, asking us to address his supplemental assignments of error. We held our decision pending resolution of Ramos v. Louisiana , 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed. 2d 583 (2020), as well as cases subsequently taken under advisement by the Oregon Supreme Court that presented Ramos issues.
Those cases have now issued, and one of them, State v. Dilallo , 367 Or. 340, 478 P.3d 509 (2020), is controlling. At trial, defendant did not object to the instruction, nor was the jury polled. Accordingly, we reject defendant's unpreserved argument in light of Dilallo .
Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.