LAW.coLAW.co

STATE v. SCALES (2021)

Supreme Court of Louisiana.2021-03-23No. No. 2021-KH-00154

Summary

Holding. The writ application is denied.

The applicant sought post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of counsel under the Strickland standard. The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance and denied the writ application. The court emphasized that the applicant has now fully exhausted his state collateral review remedies through the post-conviction procedures available under Louisiana law, and no further applications may be filed unless he can satisfy one of the narrow exceptions permitting successive filings.

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

Key issues

  • Ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington
  • Exhaustion of state collateral review remedies
  • Successive post-conviction applications and procedural bars
  • Retroactivity of Ramos v. Louisiana

Procedural posture

The applicant filed a post-conviction relief application challenging his conviction on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

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).

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.

WEIMER, C.J., would grant to address the retroactivity of Ramos v. Louisiana, ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed. 2d 583 (2020).

Weimer, C.J., would grant and assigns reasons.

Griffin, J., would grant for the reasons assigned by Chief Justice Weimer.