State ex rel. Frazier v. State

206 So. 3d 177, 2016 La. LEXIS 2366
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided November 15, 2016·No. No. 2015-KH-1856·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

| ¶Writ not considered; not timely filed. La. S.CL Rule X, § 5.

Relator has now fully litigated at least 10 applications for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, see 28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator’s claims have now been fully litigated in state collateral proceedings in accord with La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless relator can show that [178] one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The District Court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

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

State ex rel. Frazier v. State, 206 So. 3d 177, 2016 La. LEXIS 2366 (La. 2016).

206 So. 3d 177 (State ex rel. Frazier v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Frazier
268 So. 3d 1032 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2019)