In this criminal appeal, the trial court gave the jury a nonunanimous jury instruction, and the jury returned a nonunanimous guilty verdict on Count 2 and unanimous guilty verdicts on Counts 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Defendant was acquitted on Count 1.). The guilty verdict for Count 3 was merged into Count 2 and the guilty verdict for Count 6 was merged into Count 4. Defendant assigns as error the trial courts denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal (MJOA) on Count 5, and he raises a challenge under Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 206 L. Ed. 2d 583 (2020). We reject the assignment of error concerning the MJOA without written discussion. As to defendants Ramos challenge, we accept the states concession that the trial court erred in accepting the nonunanimous guilty verdict for Count 2 and reject defendants arguments concerning the verdicts for which the jury unanimously found defendant guilty. Ramos, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 1390; State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or. 292, 319, 334, 478 P.3d 515 (2020). We reverse defendants conviction on Count 2 and remand the case for resentencing, which includes entering a new disposition for Count 3. See State v. Bittick, 316 Or. App. 686, 687-88, ––– P.3d –––– (2021) (doing same).
Conviction on Count 2 reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
PER CURIAM