495 P.3d 196
Or. Ct. App.2021Background
- Defendant Gloria Mae Reed-Hack was convicted of first-degree arson (Count 1), first-degree criminal mischief (Count 2), and second-degree criminal mischief (Count 3).
- At trial, the jury received an instruction that allowed conviction by a nonunanimous verdict; neither party objected and the jury was not polled, so the record does not show whether jurors were unanimous.
- The written judgment of conviction included a special probation condition on Count 1 requiring the defendant to submit to polygraph examinations at the probation officer’s discretion; that condition was not announced in open court at sentencing.
- The judgment for Count 2 incorporated the probation conditions imposed on Count 1.
- On appeal to the Oregon Court of Appeals, Reed-Hack raised four assignments of error; the court rejected the first assignment without discussion, addressed the nonunanimous-instruction claim, and considered the challenges to the probation conditions.
- The court accepted the State’s concession that the polygraph condition was improperly included in the written judgment without being announced in open court, remanded for resentencing on that basis, and otherwise affirmed the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. First assignment of error (unspecified) | State: conviction should stand | Reed-Hack: error warranting relief | Rejected without discussion |
| 2. Jury instruction permitting nonunanimous verdicts | State: Dilallo forecloses relief under Ramos | Reed-Hack: instruction violated Sixth Amendment; asks for structural or plain-error review | Rejected; Dilallo forecloses relief despite Ramos holding |
| 3. Probation condition requiring polygraph (Count 1) not announced in open court | State: concedes omission was error and requests remand | Reed-Hack: condition invalid and not reasonably related to offense/rehabilitation | Court accepted concession; remanded for resentencing; did not decide relatedness issue |
| 4. Count 2 condition incorporating Count 1 probation condition | State: interprets defendant to challenge incorporation; treats as tied to Issue 3 | Reed-Hack: incorporation improperly subjected her to polygraph requirement | Treated same as Issue 3; remanded for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Ramos v. Louisiana, 140 S. Ct. 1390 (Sixth Amendment requires unanimous jury verdicts in state criminal trials)
- State v. Dilallo, 367 Or. 340 (Oregon Supreme Court decision addressing Ramos-based claims and limiting relief)
- State v. Keen, 304 Or. App. 89 (remand for resentencing where a probation condition was not announced in open court)