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

United States District Court, C.D. California

September 11, 2019

FLOYD SCOTT, Petitioner,
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent.

          HONORABLE KENLY KIYA KATO United States Magistrate Judge

          ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

          HONORABLE JAMES V. SELNA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         On June 19, 2019, Floyd Scott (“Petitioner”) constructively filed[1] a “Motion for Rule 60(b) Hearing” which the Court construes as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (“Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his 2008 conviction. On August 7, 2019, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause Why Petition Should Not Be Summarily Dismissed As Second And Successive (“OSC”). On August 19, 2019, Petitioner constructively filed a response to the OSC. For the reasons discussed below, the Court summarily DISMISSES this action without prejudice.

         II. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS

         On June 21, 1999, Petitioner was convicted of assault to commit rape, forcible oral copulation, penetration by a foreign object, and false imprisonment by violence in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Scott v. Harrington, No. CV 11-5738-GAF (AJW), 2014 WL 3571732, at *1 (C.D. Cal. June 10, 2014), report and recommendation adopted, 2014 WL 3589828 (C.D. Cal. July 18, 2014).[2] Petitioner was sentenced to state prison for a term of 225 years to life. Id.

         On March 21, 2003, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (“2003 Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in this Court challenging his 1999 conviction. Scott v. Lamarque, No. CV 03-2003-GAF (AJW), Dkt. 1. On December 19, 2006, Petitioner's 2003 Petition challenging his 1999 conviction was granted and he was ordered retried or released within 90 days. Id. at Dkt. 42, Judgment.[3]

         On August 10, 2008, upon retrial, Petitioner was convicted of one count of assault to commit rape, two counts of forcible oral copulation, one count of penetration by a foreign object, and one count of false imprisonment by violence. Scott v. Asuncion, No. CV 16-2973-JVS (AJW), 2016 WL 3583837, at *1 (C.D. Cal. June 6, 2016), report and recommendation adopted, 2016 WL 3607156 (C.D. Cal. June 29, 2016). The jury also found true the allegations that Petitioner tied and bound the victim in the commission of the offenses, had suffered prior felony convictions, and had served a prison term without remaining free of custody for a period of five years. Id. Petitioner was sentenced to state prison for a term of 275 years to life. Id.

         Petitioner appealed his conviction to the California Courts of Appeal, which affirmed the judgment in a reasoned decision on October 28, 2009. People v. Scott, No. B210946, 2009 WL 3450270, at *1 (Cal.Ct.App. Oct. 28, 2009).

         Petitioner then filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court, which was summarily denied on January 13, 2010. California Courts, Appellate Courts Case Information, Docket, https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/ case/dockets.cfm?dist=0&docid=1924923&docno=S177667&requesttoken=NiI wLSIkTkw3WzBRSSFdVEtJQFw0UDxfJCMuXzxSQCAgCg%3D%3D (last updated Sept. 4, 2019 2:09 PM).

         On July 4, 2011, Petitioner constructively filed a habeas petition in this Court (the “2011 Petition”) challenging his 2008 conviction and raising the following sixteen claims for relief:

1. The admission of the victim's preliminary hearing testimony violated Petitioner's right to confrontation.
2. The trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of Petitioner's prior rapes.
3. Petitioner was denied due process by the admission of evidence of other crimes for the purpose of inferring his propensity ...

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.