No. 689 July 30, 2025 325 This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROBERT JAMES BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant.

Lincoln County Circuit Court 121345; A184183 Sheryl Bachart, Judge.

Submitted June 13, 2025.

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Morgen E. Daniels, Chief Deputy Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant.

Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.

Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.

EGAN, J.

Affirmed.

326 State v. Bailey EGAN, J.

Defendant appeals an amended judgment of convic- tion. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or 434, 814 P2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.1 In March 2013, defendant was convicted, after a jury trial, of three counts of first degree unlawful sexual penetration, ORS 163.411 (Counts 1, 4, and 9); and seven counts of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427 (Counts 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12). The verdicts on Counts 11 and 12 were nonunanimous.

Defendant was sentenced to 300 months in prison on Count 1; 75 months in prison on Count 2, concurrent with Count 1; 300 months in prison on Count 4, with 108 months consecutive to Count 1 and the remaining months concur- rent with Count 1; 75 months in prison on Count 5, concur- rent with Count 4; 75 months in prison on Count 7, consec- utive to the sentences on Counts 1, 4, and 9; 300 months in prison on Count 9, consecutive to the sentences on Counts and 4; 75 months on Count 10, concurrent with the sen- tences on Counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 9; 75 months in prison on Count 11, concurrent with the sentences on Counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10; and 75 months in prison on Count 12, concur- rent with the sentences on Counts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, and 11.

Defendant later filed a petition for post-conviction relief, and the post-conviction court vacated defendant’s con- victions on Counts 11 and 12 and remanded to the criminal trial court, pursuant to Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 US 83, 140 S Ct 1390, 206 L Ed 2d 583 (2020) and Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or 604, 523 P3d 86 (2022). The post-conviction court concluded that defendant had failed to prove any of his other claims, including that any of the jury’s findings supporting departure sentences were nonunanimous.

On remand, the state moved to dismiss Counts 11 and 12, and the criminal trial court granted that motion.

The court then entered an amended judgment resentencing As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel.

Nonprecedential Memo Op: 342 Or App 325 (2025) 327 defendant on the remaining counts as it had in 2013. This appeal followed.

Having reviewed the record, including the trial court file, the transcript of the hearings and the bench trial, and the Balfour brief, we have identified no arguably meri- torious issues.

Affirmed.