From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Johnson

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Aug 12, 2019
279 So. 3d 368 (La. 2019)

Opinion

No. 2018-KH-1734

08-12-2019

STATE of Louisiana v. Donald JOHNSON


PER CURIAM:

Denied. Applicant does not identify an illegal term in his sentence, and therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction relief. See State v. Parker , 98-0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. As such, it is subject to the time limitation set forth in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and applicant 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.

Applicant has now fully litigated several 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. 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. Johnson

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Aug 12, 2019
279 So. 3d 368 (La. 2019)
Case details for

State v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. DONALD JOHNSON

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Aug 12, 2019

Citations

279 So. 3d 368 (La. 2019)