Jennifer Scott v. State

Citation: Not availableDocket: 07-03-00279-CR

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; December 15, 2003; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Jennifer Scott appeals the revocation of her probation after having pled guilty to failing to identify herself as a fugitive from justice. Initially sentenced to 90 days of imprisonment, her sentence was suspended in favor of one year of probation. The State later moved to revoke her probation, citing violations of six conditions, which resulted in a 90-day jail sentence.

Scott argues ineffective assistance of counsel on two grounds: first, failure to object to urinalysis results indicating drug use, and second, leading her to admit to some allegations in the motion to revoke despite her initial denial. The court referenced the standard for evaluating ineffective assistance of counsel established in Strickland v. Washington, stating that Scott did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate her counsel's actions were not part of a reasonable strategy.

Concerning the urinalysis evidence, the court noted that Scott had already confessed to using controlled substances multiple times during her probation. The counsel’s decision not to object could be viewed as strategic, as the evidence corroborated her own admissions. Scott failed to show how excluding the urinalysis results would have altered the outcome of her case.

Regarding her admission of the allegations, the court found that Scott did not present any evidence or explanation as to why her counsel's questioning was prejudicial or ill-advised. The presumption remained that the counsel's actions were strategically sound.

Ultimately, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that Scott did not meet her burden of proof to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.