Robertson v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Robertson v. State

733 So. 2d 610, 1999 La. LEXIS 319, 1999 WL 496889

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 18, 1999

DocketNo. 99-KD-0450

StatusPublished

This text of 733 So. 2d 610 (Robertson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robertson v. State, 733 So. 2d 610, 1999 La. LEXIS 319, 1999 WL 496889 (La. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

KNOLL, Justice,

dissenting.

This Court affirmed defendant’s first degree murder conviction and death sentence on March 4, 1998. The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari on October 5, 1998. Defendant’s request at this late date, a mere seven days before his February 22, 1999, execution date, appears to be more of an effort to manipulate the judicial system than a worthy complaint. Defendant alleges no specific complaints or wrongdoings in his application, but only recites a litany of issues upon which post-conviction relief may be granted. Under these facts, I would deny Defendants’s stay and deny his belated request for appointment of counsel, at no cost to himself, to represent him in post-conviction proceedings. Inmates have no constitutional right to representation in post-conviction proceedings, even when they are on death row. See Roy v. State, 97-2466 (La.10/10/97), 703 So.2d 590 (Knoll, J., dissenting); Williams v. State, 99-0365 (La.2/10/99), — So.2d -, 1999 WL 90187 (Knoll, J. dissenting).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KNOLL, Justice,

dissenting.

This Court affirmed defendant’s first degree murder conviction and death sentence on March 4, 1998. The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari on October 5, 1998. Defendant’s request at this late date, a mere seven days before his February 22, 1999, execution date, appears to be more of an effort to manipulate the judicial system than a worthy complaint. Defendant alleges no specific complaints or wrongdoings in his application, but only recites a litany of issues upon which post-conviction relief may be granted. Under these facts, I would deny Defendants’s stay and deny his belated request for appointment of counsel, at no cost to himself, to represent him in post-conviction proceedings. Inmates have no constitutional right to representation in post-conviction proceedings, even when they are on death row. See Roy v. State, 97-2466 (La.10/10/97), 703 So.2d 590 (Knoll, J., dissenting); Williams v. State, 99-0365 (La.2/10/99), — So.2d -, 1999 WL 90187 (Knoll, J. dissenting).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

733 So. 2d 610, 1999 La. LEXIS 319, 1999 WL 496889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robertson-v-state-la-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack