State v. Prichard

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Prichard

485 P.3d 320, 310 Or. App. 865

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 21, 2021

DocketA172883

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 485 P.3d 320 (State v. Prichard) 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. Prichard, 485 P.3d 320, 310 Or. App. 865 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

Submitted March 30, affirmed April 21, petition for review denied August 26, 2021 (368 Or 514)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GREGORY GERALD PRICHARD, Defendant-Appellant. Yamhill County Circuit Court 19CR04120; A172883 485 P3d 320

Ladd J. Wiles, Judge. Lindsey Burrows and O’Connor Weber LLC filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. 866 State v. Prichard

PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted by unanimous jury ver- dict of first-degree sexual abuse and endangering the wel- fare of a minor. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it need not reach unanimous verdicts and contends that, because the errone- ous jury instruction constituted a structural error, his con- viction must be reversed in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The Oregon Supreme Court rejected the structural error argument in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 319, 478 P3d 515 (2020). Further, when, as here, the jury returns unanimous ver- dicts despite the erroneous nonunanimous instruction, such error was rendered “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” as to all of the verdicts of this case. State v. Ciraulo, 367 Or 350, 354, 478 P3d 502 (2020). Affirmed.

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

Submitted March 30, affirmed April 21, petition for review denied August 26, 2021 (368 Or 514)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GREGORY GERALD PRICHARD, Defendant-Appellant. Yamhill County Circuit Court 19CR04120; A172883 485 P3d 320

Ladd J. Wiles, Judge. Lindsey Burrows and O’Connor Weber LLC filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. 866 State v. Prichard

PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted by unanimous jury ver- dict of first-degree sexual abuse and endangering the wel- fare of a minor. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it need not reach unanimous verdicts and contends that, because the errone- ous jury instruction constituted a structural error, his con- viction must be reversed in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). The Oregon Supreme Court rejected the structural error argument in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 319, 478 P3d 515 (2020). Further, when, as here, the jury returns unanimous ver- dicts despite the erroneous nonunanimous instruction, such error was rendered “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” as to all of the verdicts of this case. State v. Ciraulo, 367 Or 350, 354, 478 P3d 502 (2020). Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

485 P.3d 320, 310 Or. App. 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-prichard-orctapp-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack