Opinion
23-KH-185
04-12-2023
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MARVIN ROBINSON IN RE MARVIN ROBINSON
APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE DONALD A. ROWAN, JR., DIVISION "L", NUMBER 05-2673
Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Stephen J. Windhorst, and John J. Molaison, Jr.
Relator's counsel notified the court reporter of the need for the transcript to file relator's writ application and was told that it would take thirty days to complete, but a fifty percent deposit of the estimated fee for the transcript was required before she would begin preparing it. At that time, counsel informed the court reporter of relator's intent to move for a free transcript due to his indigency.
On April 4, 2023, relator filed a motion for in forma pauperis status and free transcript of the post-conviction evidentiary hearing. He also moved for an extension of the pending return date in order to give the court reporter sufficient time to complete the transcript. The State did not respond to the motions, either challenging relator's indigency status or his right to the transcript at no cost. The district court summarily denied relator's motions, without reasons.
In the instant writ application, relator challenges the district court's ruling (1) denying his request to proceed in forma pauperis and to a free copy of the transcript of the March 17, 2023 evidentiary hearing, and (2) denying his request for an extension of the return date to file his writ application challenging the denial of his APCR based on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Harris, supra.
In his motion for in forma pauperis status filed in the district court, citing State ex rel. Simmons v. State, 93-275 (La. 12/16/94), 647 So.2d 1094, 1095, relator asserted that he was indigent and, thus, was entitled to a copy of the transcript of his post-conviction hearing at no cost to him. Attached to relator's motion is his in forma pauperis affidavit, signed and notarized on March 30, 2023, attesting that he is incarcerated with no source of income.
Although as a general matter incarcerated indigents must demonstrate a particularized need for a court document before receiving a copy of it free of charge, the Supreme Court has established exceptions to that rule. State ex rel. Simmons v. State, 94-2630 (La. 12/16/94), 647 So.2d 1094, 1095 (per curiam). Thus, indigent inmates must be provided with "copies of transcripts of evidentiary hearings held on their applications for post conviction relief." Id.; see State v. Feet, 617 So.2d 921 (La. 1993); see also, State ex rel. Nguyen v. State, 13-1256 (La. 11/15/13), 125 So.3d 1097.
The district court may, however, decline to order cost-free production of documents under Simmons "in cases in which the time limitations period of [Article] 930.8[A] has expired, unless the relator has made a showing of particularized need by filing an application which would fall under the exceptions of [Article] 930.8A [(1-4)] and which needs the requested documents to support it." State ex re. Fleury v. State, 93-2898 (La. 10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488. See also State ex rel. Brown v. State, 03-2568 (La. 3/26/04), 870 So.3d 976, 977 (per curiam); State ex rel. Jones v. State, 13-1634 (La. 1/27/14), 131 So.3d 52. Here, although the official record indicates the State raised an objection as to the untimeliness of relator's application for post-conviction relief, the record shows the district court denied the objection and proceeded with the evidentiary hearing on the merits. Consequently, we find Simmons applies and relator, an indigent inmate, is entitled to a copy of the transcript free of charge.
Accordingly, we grant relator's writ application and the district court is instructed to provide relator with a free copy of the transcript of the evidentiary hearing conducted on March 17, 2023, on his application for post-conviction relief related to his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Additionally, because the court reporter has advised that she needs at least thirty days to complete the transcript of the evidentiary hearing, we grant relator's request for an additional forty-five days from the date of this disposition to file his writ application challenging the district court's March 17, 2023 ruling denying relator's application for post-conviction relief.
Gretna, Louisiana, this 12th day of April, 2023.
SMC
SJW
JJM