Case ID: so3d_232/html/0545-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE EX REL. Felicia YOUNG v. STATE of Louisiana
    No. 2016-KH-1569
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    01/09/2018
   ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF WASHINGTON '

PER CURIAM

| iDenied. Relator’s sentencing claim is not cognizable on collateral review. La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.

Relator has now fully litigated her 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. Relator’s claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La. C.Cr.P. Art. 930.6, and.this denial is final. Hereafter, unless- she can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted her right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.