Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Scott v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

September 23, 2019

ISAAC SCOTT
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE

          Assigned on Briefs August 7, 2019

          Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 03-04821 Lee V. Coffee, Judge.

         A Shelby County jury convicted the Petitioner, Isaac Scott, of first degree premeditated murder, for which the Petitioner received an automatic life sentence. The Petitioner appealed, and this court affirmed the conviction and sentence. See State v Isaac Scott, No. W2005-02902-CCA-R3-CD, 2006 WL 3837243 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Dec. 28, 2006), perm. app. denied (Tenn. April 30, 2007). The Petitioner then filed a post-conviction petition, claiming he received the ineffective assistance of counsel and, following a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. This court affirmed the post-conviction court's denial. Isaac Scott v. State, No. W2009-01256-CCA-R3-PC, 2011 WL 744764 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Mar. 2, 2011), perm. app. denied (Tenn. May 26, 2011). In May 2018, the Petitioner filed a "Motion for Plain and Harmless Error Review." The trial court, treating the motion as a post-conviction petition, summarily dismissed the motion because the issues had been previously determined and the petition was a second petition. The Petitioner appeals the denial, maintaining that he is entitled to plain error relief due to the jury instructions, the sentencing hearing, and the jury composition. After review, we affirm the post-conviction court's judgment.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed.

          Isaac Scott, Whiteville, Tennessee, Pro Se.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; M. Todd Ridley, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and Leslie Byrd, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          Robert W. Wedemeyer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Norma McGee Ogle and D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER, JUDGE.

         I. Facts

         A Shelby County jury convicted the Petitioner of the first degree premeditated murder of the victim in this case. At trial, the Petitioner's confession to choking the victim and pushing her out of the car was introduced. Following conviction, he received an automatic life sentence. This court affirmed the Petitioner's conviction and sentence on appeal. Scott, 2006 WL 3837243 at *1. The Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief and this Court affirmed the denial on appeal. Scott v. State, 2011 WL 744764 at *1.

         On May 23, 2018, the Petitioner, pro se, filed a document captioned "Motion for Plain and Harmless Error Review." The motion alleged that the Petitioner was entitled to plain error relief due to the jury instructions, the sentencing hearing, and the composition of the jury. The Petitioner requested a new trial based upon these errors. The post-conviction court summarily entered an order dismissing the Petitioner's motion, which it characterized as a "Motion for Plain and Harmless Error Review/Petition for Post-Conviction Relief." Noting the Petitioner's 2009 post-conviction petition and this court's affirmation of the post-conviction court's denial, the trial court denied the motion/petition as follows:

The [P]etitioner continues to attack the finality of his conviction and sentence. The [P]etitioner is essentially complaining that the sentence is illegal, that the trial court improperly charged and impaneled the trial jury, that the trial court failed to properly conduct a sentencing hearing, inter alia.
These issues have been previously and conclusively determined against this defendant. The [P]etitioner has filed a previous post-conviction petition and other post-sentencing petitions on this conviction and sentence. "The post-conviction statute contemplates the filing of only one (1) petition for post-conviction relief. In no event may more than one (1) petition for post-conviction relief be filed attacking a single judgment. If a prior petition has been filed which was resolved on the merits by a court of ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.