Main/Mirror Universe

This month, the Oregon Legislature passed on the opportunity send a ballot measure to voters on the issue of non-unanimous jury verdicts.

Currently, the Oregon Constitution enshrines the right to non-unanimous jury verdicts in all criminal cases except murder or aggravated murder.  10-2 is all that's needed for guilty and 10-2 is all that's needed for not guilty.  Oregon is the only state that allows non-unanimous guilty verdicts.  The only other state with a history of non-unanimous verdicts -- Louisiana -- got rid of them last year.

Although support for eliminating non-unanimous verdicts is widespread throughout Oregon's political class -- a few disgruntled prosecutors and ex-prosecutors notwithstanding -- the legislature's punt is fiscally understandable.  A ballot measure is expensive, and there is the possibility that if Oregon does nothing, the US Supreme Court will eliminate the problem in a case being argued before it on the first Monday in October:  ''Ramos v. Louisiana''.  Mr. Ramos was convicted of murder on a non-unanimous verdict before the Pelican state did away with the practice.  Since a decision is expected by February, 2020 (that is, before any ballot measure could get to the voters), it is possible, if not likely, that non-unanimous guilty verdicts will be declared unconstitutional, and Oregon defendants will have a right to a unanimous jury before they're convicted, even without the passage of a ballot measure.

Money saved, right?  Maybe not.  

The Oregon legislature likely didn't consider something that may lead them to spend the money on a ballot measure even if Mr. Ramos prevails.  The Oregon Constitution mandates 10-2 verdicts for guilty or not guilty.  If ''Ramos v. Louisiana'' finds non-unanimous guilty verdicts unconstitutional, it likely wouldn't have any impact on non-unanimous ''not guilty'' verdicts.

Thus in a world where Ramos prevails, Oregon defendants could only be convicted on a unanimous verdict but they could be acquitted on a 10-2 verdict.

Is this a huge benefit to Defendants?  In the real world, maybe not, because if the jury hung. with 10-2 voting not guilty, odds are the prosecutor would decline to re-try the case.  But in a few cases, nonunanimous not guilty verdict will be highly beneficial. 

Consequently, the Oregon legislature, at the urging of prosecutors throughout the state, may put forward a ballot measure even if Ramos wins, in order to repeal non-unanimous ''not guilty'' verdicts.  The most passionate supporters of such a ballot measure would be the very prosecutors who currently support non-unanimous guilty verdicts.  

Let's hope they appreciate the irony.
{{wl-publish: 2019-07-04 12:33:47 -0700 | Ryan@ryanscottlaw.com:Ryan  Scott  }}