Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Avery Scott’s petition for postconviction relief under Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure 37.1. The court held that Scott’s jurisdictional and prosecutorial-misconduct claims were not cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding, and that he failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel or prejudice regarding his guilty plea. The court also concluded that Scott’s plea was voluntary and that his conclusory allegations did not warrant relief.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Scott's claim that the State lacked evidence supporting the charge was a jurisdictional claim cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding.
- Whether Scott's claim that the prosecutor acted in bad faith by charging him with a crime was cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding.
- Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to seek dismissal or a writ of prohibition and by encouraging Scott to plead guilty.
- Whether the circuit court clearly erred in finding that Scott's guilty plea was voluntary and that he failed to establish ineffective assistance or prejudice.
Holdings
- A claim that the State lacked sufficient evidence to establish the charged offense is a direct sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, not a jurisdictional challenge, and is not cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding.
- Claims of prosecutorial misconduct are not cognizable in a Rule 37.1 proceeding, and a claim of actual innocence or insufficient evidence is a direct attack on the judgment rather than a proper postconviction claim under Rule 37.1.
- A defendant who pleaded guilty must show deficient performance and a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial; Scott failed to make that showing.
- An issue not raised in the original or amended Rule 37.1 petition cannot be considered for the first time on appeal.
Key quotations
“Although Scott couches his argument in terms of a jurisdictional challenge, it is actually a direct challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and is not cognizable in Rule 37.1 proceedings.” (at 5)
“We reiterate that in a case such as this one where the judgment was based on a guilty plea, the only way for Scott to demonstrate prejudice in support of his claim of ineffective assistance is by showing that there was a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s alleged error, he would not have pled guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” (at 8)
Factual background
Scott, a University of Arkansas campus security employee, encountered K.P. when she was heavily intoxicated and later went to her dormitory room, where he engaged in sexual intercourse with her. K.P. reported that she remembered little of the events and had awakened with Scott performing oral sex on her. Scott initially denied that K.P. was too intoxicated to consent. After the charge was reduced from rape to second-degree sexual assault, Scott pleaded guilty and later claimed that counsel pressured him to accept the plea and incorrectly advised him concerning withdrawal of the plea.
Procedural history
Scott was initially charged with rape, but the State amended the felony information to charge second-degree sexual assault. He pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 180 months' imprisonment, with 84 months suspended. After the circuit court denied his motion to withdraw the plea, Scott filed a Rule 37.1 petition alleging lack of jurisdiction, prosecutorial bad faith, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The circuit court denied relief, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed.