STATE v. SEAWRIGHT (2020)

Writ application denied.

ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF LAFAYETTE

Denied. Applicant fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Applicant 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. Applicant'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 show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

The defendant's pleadings in this court indicate that the trial court has ordered a hearing on only one allegation contained in his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. If accurate, the trial court should reserve ruling on the entirety of the defendant's claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel until it has heard all of the evidence relevant to this claim.

Furthermore, the court's writ denial today, which indicates that defendant has now fully litigated his post-conviction relief application is not accurate, since according to the defendant, the remainder of his post-conviction challenge is still pending in the trial court.