Court Opinion

ID: 9892482
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-24 00:06:54.637273+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:09:00.474068
License: Public Domain

STATE OF LOUISIANA

STATE        OF    LOUISIANA                                                                             NO.       2023       KW     0748

VERSUS

KIAN     TATE                                                                                      OCTOBER               23,        2023

In    Re:              Kian            Tate,        applying   for  supervisory                                         writs,            19th
                       Judicial                 District Court,  Parish of  East                                        Baton        Rouge,
                       No.     09- 09- 0319.

BEFORE:                WELCH,              HOLDRIDGE,             AND    WOLFE,         JJ.

         WRIT          DENIED              ON    THE       SHOWING          MADE.         Relator         failed          to        include
a     file        dated            copy          of        the     motion           for       appeal,          a        copy        of     any
motions           filedrequesting documents, the  district court'                                                              s ruling
on    the      motions,  if any,  and any other  portions of the                                                               district
court        record           that           might          support           the       claims          raised          in     the        writ

application.                   Supplementation                         of     this      writ     application                  and/ or       an
application                  for       rehearing              will          not    be     considered.                    See        Uniform
Rules        of        Louisiana                 Courts           of    Appeal,           Rules         2- 18. 7 &             4-   9.     Any
future         filing             on        this       issue       should           include         the        entire          contents

of    this        application,                     the       missing           items       noted         above,          and        a     copy
of this ruling.

         It       is    noted              that       as    an    indigent           inmate,          relator            is    entitled
to      receive              certain             court           documents,               such      as     the          guilty            plea

transcript,                   the            bill           of         information               or       indictment,                      the
commitment              papers,                 the    court       minutes           for      various          portions              of    the
trial,     and the minutes of his sentencing, free                                                       of        charge           without
the     necessity of establishing a particularized                                                        need.               See        State
ex      rel.       Simmons                 v.     State,           93- 0275 (           La.      12/ 16/ 94),                647         So. 2d
1094,        1095 (      per        curiam).                 As    to        all   other       documents,                an    indigent

inmate has the constitutional right to free copies only in those
instances              in     which              he        shows        that       denial          of    the        request               will

deprive           him        of        an       adequate           opportunity                to      present            his         claims

fairly.                 Meeting                  that        constitutional                    threshold                 requires                a

showing           of     a    particularized                       need.             An     inmate        therefore                  cannot

make     a     showing              of          particularized                 need        absent         a    properly                  filed
application                  for       postconviction                    relief,           which         sets       out        specific

claims            of         constitutional                        errors                                      the
                                                                                        requiring                             requested

documentation                     for           support.                 See        State        ex      rel.            Bernard            v.

Criminal          District                  Court          Section " J",             94- 2247 (          La.       4/   28/ 95),           653
So. 2d      1174,        1175 (             per       curiam).               See    also      State       ex       rel.        McKnight
v.    State,           98- 2258 (               La.        App.        1st    Cir.        12/ 3/ 98),          742       So. 2d           894,
895 (    per      curiam).

COURT       OF APPEAL,                 FIRST          CIRCUIT
                              n        I

            EPUTY        CLERK             OF    COURT
                   FOR        THE          COURT