Writ application denied.
While I agree with this Courts decision to deny the writ application in this case, I write separately to interpret the court of appeals incomplete, if not inartful, order remanding the case “with instructions for the trial court to consider the August 1, 2022, application on the merits.” This imprecise language arguably suggests that the district court is limited to ruling on the merits of defendants application and, therefore, is barred from addressing the states procedural objections. In this case, since the matter is being remanded due to the improper consideration of the application by the recused judge, the new judge may consider the August 1, 2022 application pursuant to the procedures set forth at La.C.Cr.P. art. 924 et seq. These articles provide an orderly procedure for consideration of post-conviction applications. Indeed, article 927 provides that, “[i]f procedural objections are timely filed, no answer on the merits of the claim may be ordered until such objections have been considered and rulings thereon have become final.” For these reasons, on remand, the district court may rule on any timely filed procedural objections raised by the state before considering the merits of defendants claims for relief.