Scott v. State
2012 Ark. 199
| Ark. | 2012Background
- Scott was charged Oct. 8, 2009 with rape under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-103 based on alleged intercourse with K.P. while intoxicated.
- The State amended the charge to second-degree sexual assault under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-125; Scott pled guilty and was sentenced to 180 months with 84 months suspended.
- Investigation followed after K.P.'s roommate Deaver observed irregular conduct; campus police intervened and investigation led to Scott.
- Scott filed a motion to withdraw his plea alleging involuntariness due to attorney pressure; the motion was denied.
- Trial counsel, Parks, testified that plea negotiations occurred at Scott's request and that he did not coerce a guilty plea; prosecutor allegedly warned of possible rape charge if plea were withdrawn.
- Scott filed a Rule 37.1 petition; the circuit court denied relief, finding the plea voluntary and that counsel's performance was not prejudicial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to convict and sentence Scott | Scott contends lack of proof of forcible conduct or incapacitation; argues no crime was committed. | State argues jurisdiction not defeated by factual disputes and appeal on Rule 37.1 grounds is limited. | Not error; challenge is sufficiency-based, not cognizable on Rule 37.1 |
| Prosecutor acted in bad faith by charging a non-criminal act | Scott asserts prosecutor knew crime could not be proven due to intoxication lacking incapacity | State contends prosecutorial misconduct claims are not cognizable on Rule 37.1 and sufficiency challenge not cognizable | Cognizable claims not entertained; not reversible on this ground |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to seek dismissal or writs | Scott claims counsel pressured plea and should have challenged probable cause or sought dismissal | State argues Scott did not show but-for prejudice; conclusory claims insufficient | Denied; no prejudice shown; plea voluntary and intelligently waived |
| Whether Scott could show prejudice to challenge the plea | Scott argues he reserved rights and reservations about pleading guilty | State notes no direct assertion that but-for counsel's errors he would have gone to trial | No reversible error; Scott did not prove reasonable probability of trial if not guilty plea |
Key Cases Cited
- Montgomery v. State, 385 S.W.3d 189 (Ark. 2011) (standard for reviewing Rule 37.1 findings; clearly erroneous if not supported by evidence)
- Jamett v. State, 358 S.W.3d 874 (Ark. 2010) (claims in Rule 37.1 pleadings focus on voluntariness of plea and ineffective assistance)
- French v. State, 2009 WL 3047356 (Ark. 2009) (per curiam; limits on cognizable Rule 37.1 claims related to voluntariness)
- Buchheit v. State, 6 S.W.3d 109 (Ark. 1999) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance when guilty plea entered)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (establishes prejudice link between counsel performance and guilty plea outcomes)