From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Clemmons

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Aug 12, 2019
279 So. 3d 367 (La. 2019)

Opinion

No. 2018-KH-1711

08-12-2019

STATE of Louisiana v. Carlos T. CLEMMONS


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 also fails to show that 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). As to his remaining claims, applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2. The application is also repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4.

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


Summaries of

State v. Clemmons

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Aug 12, 2019
279 So. 3d 367 (La. 2019)
Case details for

State v. Clemmons

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. CARLOS T. CLEMMONS

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Aug 12, 2019

Citations

279 So. 3d 367 (La. 2019)