From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ozenne

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Jan 28, 2019
262 So. 3d 276 (La. 2019)

Opinion

No. 2017-KP-0097

01-28-2019

STATE of Louisiana v. Harold OZENNE


ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF LAFAYETTE

PER CURIAM:Denied. Relator 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). Additionally, relator 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).

Relator 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 La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in state collateral proceedings 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.

Hughes, J., would grant the writ.


Summaries of

State v. Ozenne

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Jan 28, 2019
262 So. 3d 276 (La. 2019)
Case details for

State v. Ozenne

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. HAROLD OZENNE

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Jan 28, 2019

Citations

262 So. 3d 276 (La. 2019)