In one of these consolidated cases, defendant was convicted by jury of assaulting a public safety officer, second-degree escape, resisting arrest, and driving while suspended. The jury was instructed that it need not reach unanimous verdicts, but was not polled. In the other consolidated case, defendant pleaded no contest to first-degree failure to appear. He makes no argument on appeal concerning the failure to appear case. As for the case tried to a jury, he raises several issues with respect to the trial and the judgment, including an argument that the trial court plainly erred in instructing the jury that it need not reach unanimous verdicts. We reject without discussion all of defendants arguments concerning the trial and the judgment except his argument that the court plainly erred in instructing the jury that it need not reach unanimous verdicts. Defendant contends that because of the erroneous jury instruction, all verdicts must be reversed in light of Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020). We reject that argument for the reasons set forth in State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 478 P.3d 515 (2020) and State v. Dilallo, 367 Or. 340, 478 P.3d 509 (2020).
Affirmed.
PER CURIAM