State v. Sangrolla
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
316 February 10, 2021 No. 86 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SHREE KRISHNA SANGROLLA, Defendant-Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 16CR37625; A168223 Benjamin N. Souede, Judge. Submitted May 29, 2020. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Meredith Allen, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Rebecca M. Auten, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Kistler, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM Count 5 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed. Cite as 309 Or App 316 (2021) 317 PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted by jury on one count of first-degree rape and four counts of first-degree sexual abuse. The jury was unanimous on the sexual abuse counts, but was not unanimous on Count 5, first-degree rape. Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court erred in admitting certain evidence, in instructing the jury that it could return nonunanimous verdicts, and in imposing restitution. We reject defendant’s evidentiary arguments without discussion. The state concedes that defendant’s conviction for first-degree rape based on a nonunanimous verdict must be reversed in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US ___, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020). We agree and accept that concession. Defendant argues that his remaining convictions also should be reversed based on the erroneous nonunanimous verdict instruction. We reject that argument for the reasons set forth in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, ___ P3d ___ (2020), in which the court concluded that the erroneous nonunanimous jury instruction was harmless with respect to unanimous verdicts. The state also concedes that the trial court erred in imposing restitution. However, our reversal of Count 5 obviates the need to address that issue. Count 5 reversed and remanded; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
