Oregon lawmakers address non-unanimous jury cases after Supreme Court decisions

The Joint Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Public Safety convened on April 21, 2025, to discuss significant developments regarding non-unanimous jury verdicts in Oregon. The meeting highlighted the ongoing implications of recent legal rulings that have reshaped the landscape of criminal justice in the state.

In the 1930s, Oregon voters approved a constitutional amendment allowing non-unanimous jury verdicts, a practice upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972. However, this changed with the 2020 Supreme Court decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, which mandated that jury verdicts must be unanimous. Following this, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that the Ramos decision should apply retroactively, leading to over 1,000 challenges to criminal convictions based on non-unanimous jury verdicts.

The Department of Justice reported that the appellate division has received more than 700 cases, while the trial division has seen over 850 cases filed, primarily through post-conviction proceedings. The majority of these cases were filed between 2019 and 2022, coinciding with the Ramos decision. The legislature responded to the influx of cases by providing additional positions to assist in managing the increased workload.

Senate Bill 321, passed in 2023, allows individuals convicted by non-unanimous juries to challenge their convictions until December 30, 2024. Despite this deadline, the trial division currently has 98 cases pending, including eight petitions filed after the cutoff date, indicating ongoing litigation surrounding these issues.

The meeting underscored the significant legal and procedural changes resulting from the Supreme Court rulings, with expectations of continued litigation as the courts work through the backlog of cases. The committee acknowledged the report from the Department of Justice and moved forward with discussions on related topics, including the protection and education account.

Overall, the meeting highlighted the evolving nature of Oregon's criminal justice system and the challenges posed by the recent legal changes, with implications for many individuals previously convicted under the non-unanimous jury system.