A jury unanimously found defendant guilty of first-degree theft, ORS 164.055, for shoplifting more than $1,400 worth of merchandise from a Beaverton Fred Meyer. On appeal, defendant raises six assignments of error. We reject without extended discussion the first five assignments of error that focus on the prosecutors closing argument. The trial court did not plainly err by failing to declare, sua sponte, a mistrial or failing to strike, sua sponte, portions of the prosecutors closing argument. In his sixth assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred when it instructed the jury that it could reach a nonunanimous guilty verdict and that the error requires reversal under a structural-error theory, notwithstanding that the jury returned a unanimous verdict. We reject that argument for the reasons set forth in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 294, 334, 478 P.3d 515 (2020) (holding that error in instructing the jury that it could return nonunanimous guilty verdicts did not require reversal of convictions rendered by unanimous guilty verdicts), and State v. Kincheloe, 367 Or. 335, 339, 478 P.3d 507 (2020) (same).
Affirmed.
PER CURIAM