From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Finch

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Mar 9, 2020
290 So. 3d 663 (La. 2020)

Opinion

No. 2019-KP-01138

03-09-2020

STATE of Louisiana v. Randy FINCH


PER CURIAM:

Motions denied; writ denied. The application is 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.

JOHNSON, C.J., would grant.


Summaries of

State v. Finch

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Mar 9, 2020
290 So. 3d 663 (La. 2020)
Case details for

State v. Finch

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. RANDY FINCH

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Mar 9, 2020

Citations

290 So. 3d 663 (La. 2020)