State ex rel. Nicholas v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Nicholas v. State

224 So. 3d 365, 2017 WL 3375479, 2017 La. LEXIS 1587

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedAugust 4, 2017

DocketNo. 2016-KH-0534

StatusPublished

This text of 224 So. 3d 365 (State ex rel. Nicholas 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. Nicholas v. State, 224 So. 3d 365, 2017 WL 3375479, 2017 La. LEXIS 1587 (La. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

[366]*366ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ASCENSION

PER CURIAM:

h Denied. The applications were not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 980.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated three 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 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 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 cu-riam.

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

[366]*366ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ASCENSION

PER CURIAM:

h Denied. The applications were not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 980.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated three 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 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 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 cu-riam.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 So. 3d 365, 2017 WL 3375479, 2017 La. LEXIS 1587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-nicholas-v-state-la-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack