State v. Boggs, 524 P.3d 567

Defendant Ashley Boggs was convicted by a jury of two counts of first-degree theft based on removal of household fixtures, appliances, a 12-foot boat, and other items; the statutory threshold for first-degree theft was $1,000 in aggregate value.
A jury poll showed unanimity on Count 1 but a nonunanimous verdict on Count 2; the Court of Appeals earlier reversed Count 2 for nonunanimity and remanded for resentencing.
At trial Boggs requested a jury instruction that the state must prove a culpable mental state (criminal negligence) as to the property-value element; the trial court refused that instruction.
After the Oregon Supreme Court decided State v. Shedrick (holding a culpable mental state applies to the value element of first-degree theft) the Supreme Court remanded Boggs to the Court of Appeals to reconsider the mens rea issue.
On remand the Court of Appeals held that the value element requires a mens rea (assumed criminal negligence), that the trial court erred by refusing the instruction, but that the error was harmless because the evidence compelled a finding of at least criminal negligence as to value.
Result: conviction on Count 1 affirmed (error harmless); conviction on Count 2 reversed and remanded for resentencing (due to earlier nonunanimous verdict issue).

Issue	State's Argument	Boggs's Argument	Held
Whether the property-value element of first-degree theft requires a culpable mental state	Value element need not carry a culpable mental state (relying on prior COA precedent)	Value element requires at least criminal negligence; requested negligence instruction required	Value is a material element requiring a mens rea; assuming criminal negligence, the trial court erred by refusing the instruction
Whether the trial-court error in refusing the negligence instruction was harmless	Error was harmless; little likelihood it affected the verdict given the evidence	Error was prejudicial; instruction omission could have affected verdict	Error was harmless: evidence required a finding of at least criminal negligence as to value (jury would likely find awareness risk was a gross deviation)
Effect of nonunanimous jury on Count 2	State defended verdict validity	Boggs argued nonunanimity required reversal	Count 2 conviction reversed and remanded for resentencing (nonunanimous verdict)

State v. Shedrick, 370 Or. 255 (2022) (held that the value element of first-degree theft is a material element that requires a culpable mental state)
State v. Boggs, 370 Or. 471 (2022) (Supreme Court remand directing COA reconsideration in light of Shedrick)
State v. Boggs, 310 Or. App. 164 (2021) (COA's original opinion affirming Count 1 and reversing Count 2 for nonunanimity)
State v. Stowell, 304 Or. App. 1 (2020) (earlier COA precedent holding no culpable mental state applies to value element)
State v. Jones, 223 Or. App. 611 (2008) (precedent relied on in COA discussion of mens rea requirements)
State v. Owen, 369 Or. 288 (2022) (explains standard for harmless-error review: affirm when little likelihood error affected verdict)