Case Name: STATE ex rel. Gerald CARLINE v. STATE of Louisiana
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 2016-10-28
Citations: 203 So. 3d 233
Docket Number: No. 14-KH-2127
Parties: STATE ex rel. Gerald CARLINE v. STATE of Louisiana
Judges: 
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 203
Pages: 233–233

Head Matter:
STATE ex rel. Gerald CARLINE v. STATE of Louisiana
No. 14-KH-2127
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
October 28, 2016

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
h Denied. Relator's sentencing claims are 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; see also State v. Cotton, 09-2397 (La. 10/15/10), 45 So.3d 1030. Relator fails to show he was denied the effective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations under the standard of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); see also State v. Thomas, 08-2912 (La. 10/16/09), 19 So.3d 466. As to the remaining claims, relator fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art.. 930.2.
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 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 he can |2show 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.