State ex rel. Gay v. State

222 So. 3d 1251, 2017 La. LEXIS 1588, 2017 WL 3379025
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedAugust 4, 2017
DocketNo. 2016-KH-0693
StatusPublished

This text of 222 So. 3d 1251 (State ex rel. Gay 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
State ex rel. Gay v. State, 222 So. 3d 1251, 2017 La. LEXIS 1588, 2017 WL 3379025 (La. 2017).

Opinion

ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO

PER CURIAM:

| ] Denied. Relator fails to show he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). In addition, relator’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4. See also State v. Gay, 48,832 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2/26/14), 136 So.3d 919, writ denied, 14-0605 (La. 10/24/14), 151 So.3d 600. Finally, relator does not show that a stay of the matter is required, and thus his motion to stay these proceedings is likewise denied. We attach hereto and make a part hereof the district court’s written reasons denying relief.

Relator has now fully litigated his application 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 12this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that 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.

Johnson, C.J. n.s.

UAttachment

[1252]*1252[[Image here]]

[1253]*1253[[Image here]]

[1254]*1254[[Image here]]

[1255]*1255[[Image here]]

[1256]*1256[[Image here]]

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

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
State v. Gay
136 So. 3d 919 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 So. 3d 1251, 2017 La. LEXIS 1588, 2017 WL 3379025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-gay-v-state-la-2017.