Scott v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2011 Ark. 97
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No.
CR 11-102
Opinion Delivered
MARIO SCOTT
Appellant
v.
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Appellee
March 3, 2011
PRO SE MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
RECORD [JEFFERSON COUNTY
CIRCUIT COURT, CR 2007-1150,
HON. JODI RAINES DENNIS,
JUDGE]
MOTION TREATED AS MOTION
FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND
GRANTED; WRIT OF CERTIORARI
ISSUED.
PER CURIAM
Appellant Mario Scott entered a negotiated plea of nolo contendere to first-degree
murder in Jefferson County Circuit Court and received a sentence of 300 months’
imprisonment, to run consecutively to a sentence appellant was already serving. He timely
filed in the trial court a pro se petition for postconviction relief under Arkansas Rule of
Criminal Procedure 37.1 (2010) that was dismissed. Appellant then lodged this appeal, and
he has now filed a motion to supplement the record.
Appellant asserts that the second page of his petition was omitted from the record. He
has attached a copy of a numbered page to his motion, and the petition in the record before
this court does not contain a page numbered as “2,” although there are pages numbered “1”
and “3.”
Appellant requests that the page he attaches be included in the record, or,
alternatively, that this court order the circuit clerk to supplement the record.
Cite as 2011 Ark. 97
Because it is not clear that the page appellant has attached to his motion was in fact
included with the petition that was filed and before the circuit court for review, we treat the
motion to supplement as a motion for writ of certiorari and grant it. The circuit clerk is
directed to review the record and determine whether the omitted second page was in fact a
part of the record. Within thirty days of the date of this opinion, the clerk shall provide either
a certified copy of any page “2” contained in the Rule 37.1 petition filed on June 11, 2010,
or confirmation that no such page was contained in the petition filed of record.
Motion treated as motion for writ of certiorari and granted; writ of certiorari issued.
2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.