From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex rel. Taylor v. State

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Sep 14, 2018
252 So. 3d 457 (La. 2018)

Opinion

No. 2018-KH-0021

09-14-2018

STATE EX REL. Mickey TAYLOR v. STATE of Louisiana


PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was 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. 930.8 ; State ex rel. Glover v. State , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated two 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 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.

WEIMER, J., recused.


Summaries of

State ex rel. Taylor v. State

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Sep 14, 2018
252 So. 3d 457 (La. 2018)
Case details for

State ex rel. Taylor v. State

Case Details

Full title:STATE EX REL. MICKEY TAYLOR v. STATE OF LOUISIANA

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Sep 14, 2018

Citations

252 So. 3d 457 (La. 2018)

Citing Cases

State v. Taylor

See La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.8(A). See alsoState ex rel. Taylor v. State, 2018-0021 (La. 9/14/18), 252…