State v. Orr

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Orr

500 P.3d 1290, 316 Or. App. 672

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 29, 2021

DocketA172278

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 500 P.3d 1290 (State v. Orr) 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. Orr, 500 P.3d 1290, 316 Or. App. 672 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Argued and submitted December 8, reversed and remanded December 29, 2021, petition for review denied May 5, 2022 (369 Or 705)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DAVID WAYNE ORR, Defendant-Appellant. Marion County Circuit Court 19CR48594; A172278 500 P3d 1290

J. Channing Bennett, Judge. Jason E. Thompson argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant. Mark E. Seepe argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Joseph Callahan, Assistant Attorney General. Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. Cite as 316 Or App 672 (2021) 673

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals judgments of conviction for first- degree unlawful sexual penetration and first-degree sexual abuse. He raises two assignments of error. We reject his first assignment of error without written discussion. In his sec- ond assignment of error, he contends that the trial court erred by accepting nonunanimous verdicts on both counts. Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The state concedes that, under Ramos, the con- victions must be reversed. State v. Ulery, 366 Or 500, 503-05, 464 P3d 1123 (2020) (acceptance of nonunanimous jury ver- dict is error under Ramos). We agree, accept the concession, and reverse and remand. Reversed and remanded.

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

Argued and submitted December 8, reversed and remanded December 29, 2021, petition for review denied May 5, 2022 (369 Or 705)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. DAVID WAYNE ORR, Defendant-Appellant. Marion County Circuit Court 19CR48594; A172278 500 P3d 1290

J. Channing Bennett, Judge. Jason E. Thompson argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant. Mark E. Seepe argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Joseph Callahan, Assistant Attorney General. Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. Cite as 316 Or App 672 (2021) 673

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals judgments of conviction for first- degree unlawful sexual penetration and first-degree sexual abuse. He raises two assignments of error. We reject his first assignment of error without written discussion. In his sec- ond assignment of error, he contends that the trial court erred by accepting nonunanimous verdicts on both counts. Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The state concedes that, under Ramos, the con- victions must be reversed. State v. Ulery, 366 Or 500, 503-05, 464 P3d 1123 (2020) (acceptance of nonunanimous jury ver- dict is error under Ramos). We agree, accept the concession, and reverse and remand. Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

500 P.3d 1290, 316 Or. App. 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-orr-orctapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack