State v. Jeffery

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Jeffery

479 P.3d 629, 308 Or. App. 833

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 27, 2021

DocketA171571

StatusPublished

This text of 479 P.3d 629 (State v. Jeffery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Jeffery, 479 P.3d 629, 308 Or. App. 833 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Submitted December 22, 2020; conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded, remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed January 27, 2021

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ANTONIO D’EPIRO JEFFERY, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 18CR82121; A171571 479 P3d 629

D. Charles Bailey, Jr., Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sarah Laidlaw, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jonathan N. Schildt, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed. 834 State v. Jeffery

PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted by jury verdict of deliv- ery of methamphetamine (Count 1), unlawful possession of methamphetamine (Count 2), and unlawful possession of a firearm (Count 4). The jury had been instructed that its ver- dicts did not need to be unanimous, which was error under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The jury was unanimous as to Counts 2 and 4, but not as to Count 1. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in giving the nonunanimous jury instruction, that the error was structural, and that all of his convictions there- fore should be reversed. The state concedes that defendant is entitled to reversal on the nonunanimous count. We agree and accept the concession and exercise our discretion to cor- rect the error for the reasons set forth in State v. Ulery, 366 Or 500, 464 P3d 1123 (2020). As for defendant’s structural error argument concerning the remaining convictions, he makes the same arguments that were rejected in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 478 P3d 515 (2020). Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Submitted December 22, 2020; conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded, remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed January 27, 2021

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ANTONIO D’EPIRO JEFFERY, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 18CR82121; A171571 479 P3d 629

D. Charles Bailey, Jr., Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sarah Laidlaw, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jonathan N. Schildt, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed. 834 State v. Jeffery

PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted by jury verdict of deliv- ery of methamphetamine (Count 1), unlawful possession of methamphetamine (Count 2), and unlawful possession of a firearm (Count 4). The jury had been instructed that its ver- dicts did not need to be unanimous, which was error under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The jury was unanimous as to Counts 2 and 4, but not as to Count 1. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in giving the nonunanimous jury instruction, that the error was structural, and that all of his convictions there- fore should be reversed. The state concedes that defendant is entitled to reversal on the nonunanimous count. We agree and accept the concession and exercise our discretion to cor- rect the error for the reasons set forth in State v. Ulery, 366 Or 500, 464 P3d 1123 (2020). As for defendant’s structural error argument concerning the remaining convictions, he makes the same arguments that were rejected in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 478 P3d 515 (2020). Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

479 P.3d 629, 308 Or. App. 833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jeffery-orctapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack