Scott v, State

Summary

The Court affirmed Scott’s CCDW conviction, holding that the trial evidence permitted a rational jury to infer that he had concealed the firearm on his person before firing it. Because Scott did not move for a judgment of acquittal, the Court reviewed the sufficiency claim for plain error and found none. The Court also deemed Scott’s challenge to the admissibility of a detective’s report waived because it was raised for the first time in his reply brief.