Washington v. Pedro ( 2024 )

No. 615 August 28, 2024 665
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion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
DAVID SAMUEL WASHINGTON,
aka David S. Washington,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
David PEDRO,
Superintendent,
Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution,
Defendant-Respondent.
Umatilla County Circuit Court
21CV13025; A182455
Jenefer Stenzel Grant, Senior Judge.
Submitted July 12, 2024.
Jason Weber and Equal Justice Law filed the brief for
appellant.
Ryan Kahn, Assistant Attorney General, waived appear-
ance for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
EGAN, J.
Affirmed.
666 Washington v. Pedro
EGAN, J.
Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying him
post-conviction relief. His 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
After a bench trial, petitioner was convicted of first-
degree rape, first-degree kidnapping, and first-degree bur-
glary. Petitioner appealed his judgment of conviction, and
we affirmed in a written opinion. State v. Washington, 266
Or App 133, 337 P3d 859 (2014), rev den, 356 Or 767 (2015).
In a successive petition for post-conviction relief, petitioner
argued that he would not have waived his right to a jury trial
if he had known that there was a possibility that the United
Supreme Court would subsequently require jury decisions
to be unanimous. The post-conviction court denied petition-
er’s claim for relief finding that his waiver of his right to a
jury trial was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent.
Having reviewed the record, including the post-
conviction court file and the transcript of the hearings, and
having reviewed the Balfour brief, we have identified no
arguably meritorious issues.
Affirmed.
1
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge
panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or App 563, 484 P3d 1098 (2021) (deciding
matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v.
Nooth, 254 Or App 402, 295 P3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 747 (2013) (same).