Ex parte Scott
Decision Date | 20 March 1998 |
Citation | 728 So. 2d 172 |
Parties | Ex parte William David SCOTT. (Re William David Scott v. State). |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
John Knowles, Geneva, for petitioner.
Bill Pryor, atty. gen., and Michael B. Billingsley, asst. atty. gen., for respondent.
William David Scott was convicted of theft of property and of murder made capital because it was committed during a burglary (§ 13A-5-40(a)(4),Ala.Code 1975) and was committed for a pecuniary consideration (§ 13A-5-40(a)(7)).The jury, voting 12-0, recommended that for the murder Scott be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.The trial judge overrode the jury's recommendation and sentenced Scott to death.The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the murder conviction and the sentence of death.Scott v. State,728 So.2d 164(Ala.Cr.App.1997).We have granted certiorari review as to the murder conviction.We affirm.
The Court of Criminal Appeals, in its opinion of January 17, 1997, set forth the following set of facts:
728 So.2d at 165-166.The Court of Criminal Appeals addressed the following six arguments in its opinion:
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Griffin v. State
...appropriate sentence in this case. We also conclude that Griffin's sentence was not disproportionate or excessive when compared to the penalties imposed in similar cases. See § 13A-5-53(b)(3), Ala. Code 1975. See, e.g.,
Ex parte Scott, 728 So.2d 172 (Ala. 1998), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 120 S.Ct. 87, ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (1999); Sockwell v. State, 675 So.2d 4 (Ala.Cr.App. 1993), aff'd, 675 So.2d 38 (Ala. 1995); and Harris v. State, 632 So.2d 503 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992), aff'd, 632... -
Yeomans v. State
...raise this objection at trial, so the claim is reviewed for plain error. Evidence of the objects found during the investigation of the crime scene within a reasonable time after the commission of the crime is always admissible.
Ex parte Scott, 728 So.2d 172, 188 (Ala.1998). We find no plain error in the admission of the Yeomans argues that: "[T]he shotgun had no bearing whatsoever on the alleged crime. The shotgun as shown by the diagram [State's Exhibit 5] was placed across a chair in... -
Martin v. State
...and desire for money. In this case, there can be no question that Martin killed his wife in order to collect some $377,000 in life insurance proceeds. Similar crimes have been punished by death on numerous occasions.
Ex parte Scott, 728 So.2d 172 (Ala.1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 831 (1999); Sockwell v. State, 675 So.2d 4 (Ala.Crim.App.1993), aff'd, 675 So.2d 38 (Ala.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 838 (1996); Harris v. State, 632 So.2d 503 (Ala.Crim.App.1992), aff'd, 632 So.2dsentence was disproportionate or excessive when compared to the penalties imposed in similar cases. This Court has upheld imposition of the death sentence in similar cases on many previous occasions. See, e.g., Ex parte Scott, 728 So.2d 172 (Ala. 1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 831, 120 S.Ct. 87 (1999); Sockwell v. State, 675 So.2d 4 (Ala.Crim.App.1993), aff'd, 675 So.2d 38 (Ala.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 838, 117 S.Ct. 115 (1996); Harris v. State, 632 So.2d 503 (Ala.Crim.App.1992),... - Smith v. State