State Ex Rel. James v. State

640 So. 2d 259, 1993 WL 225731
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedMarch 15, 1993
Docket93 KW 0242
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 640 So. 2d 259 (State Ex Rel. James v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. James v. State, 640 So. 2d 259, 1993 WL 225731 (La. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

640 So.2d 259 (1993)

STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Terry L. JAMES
v.
STATE of Louisiana.

No. 93 KW 0242.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

March 15, 1993.

Terry James, in pro. per.

Office of the Dist. Atty., St. Francisville, for respondent.

Before GONZALES, WATKINS and CRAIN, JJ.

WRIT DENIED: The trial court properly concluded that relator's claims do not properly seek habeas relief. Habeas corpus is a writ commanding a person who has another in his custody to produce him before the court and to state the authority for the custody. La.C.Cr.P. art. 351. Generally, habeas corpus is not the proper procedural device for petitioners who may file applications for post-conviction relief. La.C.Cr.P. art. 351. Essentially, habeas corpus deals with preconviction complaints concerning custody. Official Revision Comment (c), La. C.Cr.P. art. 351. An application for post-conviction relief is a petition filed by a person in custody after sentence following conviction for the commission of an offense seeking to have the conviction and sentence set aside. La.C.Cr.P. art. 924. See State ex rel. Bartie v. State, 501 So.2d 260 (La.App. 1st. Cir. 1986).

Relator contends he is eligible for habeas relief because he is no longer entitled to post conviction relief. However, habeas corpus and post conviction complaints are fundamentally different. Although some post conviction complaints may actually seek habeas relief, relator's claim is based on an allegation that his custody is unlawful because his conviction is invalid. He cannot claim that the order for his custody is illegal for this reason; and, therefore, his complaint is not in the nature of habeas corpus. Relator's claims are in the nature of post conviction relief, and his petition for habeas corpus was properly denied.

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

Related

Stevens v. Stalder
995 So. 2d 66 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
Sinclair v. Kennedy
701 So. 2d 457 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1997)
State ex rel. Lay v. Cain
691 So. 2d 135 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
640 So. 2d 259, 1993 WL 225731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-james-v-state-lactapp-1993.