Opinion
No. 21-KH-0088
03-16-2021
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. CARL WATSON
IN RE: Carl Watson - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Number(s) 77927, 1st Circuit Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2020 KW 0760; Writ application denied. See per curiam.
JDH
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
PDG
Weimer, C. J., recused. Supreme Court of Louisiana
March 16, 2021 /s/_________
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF TANGIPAHOA 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 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.