Claude Robinson Versus State of Louisiana

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: August 5, 2019
• Docket: 18-KH-707
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

CLAUDE ROBINSON NO. 18-KH-707

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

August 05, 2019

Susan Buchholz First Deputy Clerk

ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING

Panel composed of Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Marc E. Johnson, and Robert A. Chaisson

REHEARING GRANTED WITH REASONS; WRIT DENIED

MEJ FHW RAC CLAUDE ROBINSON NO. 18-KH-707

Relator, Claude Robinson, sought review of the trial court’s October

25, 2018 denial of his “Motion to Amend Sentence to Conform to Applicable

Statutory Provisions of Act No. 45; S.B. No. 126, which Enacted La. R.S.

15:308; Correction of Illegal Sentence.”

In his motion, Relator requested an amendment of his life sentence in

conformity with the provisions of Act. No. 45, enacting La. R.S. 15:308,

which was approved by the legislature during the 2006 regular session. He

argued that his habitual offender life sentence is no longer mandated and

should be amended because the three prior felony convictions used are not all

crimes of violence. In its opposition brief, the State argued that Relator’s

fourth offender adjudication is and was correct, and Relator should still

receive a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The trial court found

the State’s argument to be persuasive. The court then found Relator to be a

fourth-felony offender, and Relator’s life sentence was mandatory.

Upon initial review, based upon the available record, this Court found

that Relator’s conviction for possession with the intent to distribute heroin in

district court case number 97-2815 was not one of Relator’s predicate

convictions for his habitual offender adjudication as a fourth-felony offender.

Robinson v. State, 18-KH-707 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/30/19) (Johnson, Wicker,

Chaisson). This Court then vacated the trial court’s October 25, 2018 Order

1 that denied Relator’s motion, vacated Relator’s habitual offender sentence,

and remanded the matter to the trial court for resentencing pursuant to State

ex rel. Esteen v State, 16-949 (La. 1/30/18); 239 So.3d 233, rehearing denied,

16-949 (La. 3/13/18); 239 So.3d 266. Thereafter, the State filed a rehearing

application, seeking reconsideration of this Court’s decision.

In its rehearing application, the State reasserted its argument that

Relator’s sentence of life imprisonment without parole was correct, and the

trial court properly denied Relator’s motion. Pursuant to an Order rendered

on June 27, 2019, the State supplemented the writ application with copies of

judgments, minute entries, and transcripts evidencing actions taken by the trial

court regarding Relator’s habitual offender adjudication and sentence. Upon

review of the documentation supplemented to the writ application, we grant

the State’s rehearing request.

Although neither the trial court’s October 1, 2004 Judgment and

Reasons nor the October 1, 2004 transcript of the habitual offender

adjudication hearing mention Relator’s possession with the intent to distribute

heroin conviction, the trial court subsequently amended its habitual offender

adjudication. In a judgment rendered on October 22, 2004, the trial court

adjudicated Relator to be a fourth-felony offender based upon his conviction

for possession with the intent to distribute heroin and possession of cocaine.

As a result, we now find that the possession with the intent to distribute heroin

conviction was a predicate conviction for Relator’s habitual offender

adjudication as a fourth-felony offender.

Furthermore, we do not find the trial court erred in denying Relator’s

motion. We hold that Relator is not entitled to ameliorative relief, and his

enhanced sentence falls within the legal parameters of the sentencing

provision in effect at the time he committed the underlying offenses.

2 Accordingly, we set aside this Court’s May 30, 2019 disposition that granted

Relator’s writ application, affirm the trial court’s October 25, 2018 ruling, and

deny Relator’s writ application.

3 SUSAN M. CHEHARDY MARY E. LEGNON

CHIEF JUDGE INTERIM CLERK OF COURT

FREDERICKA H. WICKER CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK JUDE G. GRAVOIS MARC E. JOHNSON ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN BUCHHOLZ STEPHEN J. WINDHORST FIRST DEPUTY CLERK HANS J. LILJEBERG JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIFTH CIRCUIT MELISSA C. LEDET JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053) DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF POST OFFICE BOX 489 GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION IN THE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN TRANSMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS DAY 08/05/2019 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT, AND AT LEAST ONE OF THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY

18-KH-707 E-NOTIFIED Terry M. Boudreaux (Respondent)

MAILED Claude Robinson #104039 (Relator) Louisiana State Penitentiary Angola, LA 70712