Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

182 So. 3d 953

State v. Sartain

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided January 15, 2016

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 2016-01-15

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 2018

4 state decisions

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2016-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1. On Supervisory Writs to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans.

¶2*954| ¶ Writ denied. Relator fails to show the state withheld material exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). Additionally, 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).

¶3Relator 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 that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator’s claims have now been fully litigated 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 curiam.

/182/so3d/953 · .json · Public domain