PAYNE v. STATE (2021)

Supreme Court of Louisiana.2021-12-21No. No. 2021-KP-01120

Summary · law.co

Holding. The writ application is denied. The applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review and may not file successive applications absent narrow exceptions provided by Louisiana law.

The applicant sought post-conviction relief, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and an additional claim on the merits. The court found that the applicant failed to meet the legal standard for ineffective assistance established by Strickland v. Washington and did not satisfy the burden of proof required under Louisiana post-conviction procedure for his remaining claim. The court denied the writ application.

The applicant has now exhausted his state collateral review rights through full litigation of his post-conviction application in state court. Louisiana law, as amended in 2013, imposes mandatory procedural bars against successive post-conviction filings except in narrow circumstances. The court made clear that any future applications would be barred unless the applicant can demonstrate one of the limited exceptions allowing successive filings under Louisiana law.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether applicant received ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland standard
Whether applicant satisfied post-conviction burden of proof on remaining claims
Procedural bars to successive post-conviction applications in Louisiana

Procedural posture

The applicant filed a writ application for post-conviction relief in state court after full litigation of his claims.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

Writ application denied. See per curiam.

Denied. Applicant fails to show that 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). As to his remaining claim, applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.

Applicant 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. Applicants 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, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.