Scott v. People

Citations

• 2017 CO 16
• 390 P.3d 832
• 2017 WL 750840

Syllabus

Plain Error Review—Double Jeopardy—Lesser Included Offenses. In this case, the Supreme Court reviewed two issues: (1) whether a double jeopardy claim can be raised for the first time on appeal, and (2) whether defendant William Costello Scott's convictions for both aggravated robbery-menaced with a deadly weapon (\aggravated robbery-menaced victim\) and menacing amounted to plain error. In light of the Supreme Court's opinion in Reyna-Abarca v. People, 2017 CO 15, ___ P.3d ___, also decided on February 27, the Court concluded here, contrary to the division majority below, People v. Scott, No. 08CA2327 (Colo.App. Nov. 8, 2012), that unpreserved double jeopardy claims can be raised for the first time on appeal and that courts should ordinarily review such claims for plain error. The Court further concluded, however, that in the circumstances presented here, any error that might have occurred when the trial court entered judgment on Scott's convictions for both aggravated robbery-menaced victim and menacing was not obvious, and thus did not amount to plain error.