Opinion ID: 2444929
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Scott's Tenth Claim

Text: Scott's tenth claim is that his appellate counsel was ineffective by failing to raise all of the arguments Scott wished to have presented. As support, Scott makes general and conclusory allegations that his counsel did not discuss the appeal with him, but fails to identify any specific point that his counsel should have raised on appeal. Scott's claim cannot succeed for the reasons discussed in connection with his seventh claim. Under Jones and Evitts, counsel need not advance every argument the defendant wishes to raise, regardless of merit. [39] Scott's counsel did not act unreasonably by exercising his professional judgment in deciding what issues to raise on direct appeal. Furthermore (and contrary to Scott's assertion), Scott's counsel did, in fact, discuss with Scott the arguments that Scott wanted to have presented, and explained why he (counsel) would not make those arguments. Because Scott cannot succeed on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the trial court did not err or abuse its discretion in rejecting that claim.