Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah State Court of Appeals agreed a Salem man received insufficient counsel from his attorney as he was tried for murder after he shot and killed his wife in 2013.
In a decision handed down Thursday, the appellate court ruled the attorney who represented Tracy Scott, now 51, did not adequately push to allow Scott's testimony be admitted alleging he felt threatened by his wife.
Scott contended at trial that while he admitted from the moment he called 911 for help on March 23, 2013, that he was the one who shot his wife, 45-year-old Teresa Scott, he did so under extreme emotional distress. Scott argued the shooting was manslaughter rather than murder.
Officers responding to Scott's 911 call arrived at the house, 445 E. 300 South, and heard a man outside yelling, "I just shot my wife. She's dead." As he met officers, Scott put his hands up, knelt down and got in a prone position. Officers later testified he was "crying uncontrollably" as they arrested him and that he told them, "I just snapped."
According to the court's decision, it was widely known the Scotts' relationship was "both good and bad," vacillating between loving, happy times and "explosive" fights, several of which involved law enforcement being called.
The day before Teresa Scott's death, the couple had been fighting about oil Tracy Scott spilled in the driveway while changing oil in the family car, according to the ruling. As the fight went on, Tracy Scott discovered his wife crouched by their bed in the house, realizing their gun safe was pulled out and open and the woman's gun was missing.
Scott testified he was "scared to death" and left the house but returned later to confront his wife, and when she shouted at him, he grabbed his own gun from the open safe and shot her three times as she was lying on the bed.
At trial, as Scott attempted to testify he perceived the open gun safe and the missing firearm to be a threat, prosecutors objected, calling it hearsay evidence. Scott's attorney did not object, though the issue was central to Scott's manslaughter defense, according to the appellate court decision.
Scott was convicted of murder in August 2014 and later sentenced to serve 15 years to life in prison.
A hearing for Scott, where a new trial date could be scheduled, is set for June 1 before 4th District Judge Christine Johnson.
Judge Michele Christiansen, who concurred with the ruling, also voiced a separate opinion that Scott should not have been eligible for the "extreme emotional distress" defense.
"After Scott had abused and threatened her over the course of several years, he shot an unarmed Teresa three times, including once in the mouth, while she was lying on their bed with her cellphone in her hand. In my view, this reaction to the marital difficulties, combined with an alleged threat by Teresa, does not create a situation in which Scott should be able to claim he was exposed ‘to extreme emotional distress’ that would reasonably explain and mitigate his loss of self-control," Christiansen wrote.
Christiansen went on to say that laws allowing the extreme emotional distress defense in domestic violence cases "perpetuates a belief that violence against women and intimate-partner homicide are acceptable and legitimate," and urged the Utah Legislature to review the statute.
