State v. Acree, 565 P.3d 60

Defendant Jeremy James Acree was convicted of second-degree theft and second-degree criminal trespass after stealing items—including tools and batteries—from a construction company.
The theft occurred when Acree cut through a locked fence topped with barbed wire and took property stored in a locked trailer.
Evidence showed the stolen items, if new, were worth around $3,000 and had been recently purchased.
Acree requested jury instructions that conviction required him to have acted with criminal negligence as to the value of the stolen property, particularly whether he failed to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the property was worth over $100.
The court declined to instruct the jury on this requested mental state for the value element, and the jury convicted Acree of the lesser included offense, second-degree theft.
On appeal, the court reviewed for instructional error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was it error not to instruct on mental state for the value element of theft?	Concedes instructional error occurred	Argues error affected verdict and violated rights	Error occurred; but it was harmless beyond reasonable doubt
Did Acree preserve his argument regarding second-degree theft?	Claimed he failed to preserve as to second-degree theft	Asserted argument was preserved	Did not decide; assumed preservation for decision
Was the instructional error harmless?	Argues overwhelming evidence made error harmless	Contends error was not harmless	Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt
Should conviction be reversed due to instructional error?	No, because error did not affect outcome	Yes, instructional error requires reversal	Conviction affirmed; error was harmless

State v. Lotches, 331 Or 455 (standard for appellate review of instructional errors)
State v. Shedrick, 370 Or 255 (jury must be instructed on mental state as to value element in theft)
State v. Perkins, 325 Or App 624 (harmless error analysis where court fails to instruct on value element)
State v. Horton, 327 Or App 256 (applies federal harmlessness analysis to instructional errors)
State v. Davis, 336 Or 19 (Oregon standard for harmlessness of error)
State v. Bray, 342 Or 711 (defines when only one reasonable inference exists from evidence)