Opinion
NO. 2014 KW 1877
02-23-2015
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. WARREN C. REAVIS, III
In Re: Warren C. Reavis, III, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 528248. BEFORE: PETTIGREW, DRAKE AND CHUTZ, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. Although relator's application is timely for purposes of postconviction relief, the application is barred under State v. Cotton, 2009-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030 (per curiam), and State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172 (per curiam). A habitual offender adjudication constitutes "sentencing" for purposes of Melinie and La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.3, which provides no vehicle for postconviction consideration of claims arising out of the habitual offender proceedings. Thus, a defendant's claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at his habitual offender adjudication is not cognizable on collateral review so long as the sentence imposed by the court falls within the range of the sentencing statutes. See Cotton, 45 So.3d at 1030-31. Because relator's 12-year at hard labor habitual offender sentence falls within the range of the sentencing statutes, his claim that counsel was ineffective at the habitual offender proceedings is not cognizable in an application for postconviction relief. See La. R.S. 14:27(D)(3) & 14:62.5(C). See also 15:529.1(A)(1). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying postconviction relief. The district court also did not err by not ordering the State to file a response on the merits and by not holding an evidentiary hearing before rendering its ruling on the application. See La. Code Crim. P. arts. 928 & 929(A).
EGD
WRC
JTP
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT