STATE v. JELKS (2020)

Writ application denied. See per curiam.

Denied. Applicant fails to show that 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).

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.

Defendant pled guilty to the subject offense. An unqualified plea of guilty waives all non-jurisdictional defects and precludes their review by appeal or postconviction relief. State v. Crosby, 338 So. 2d 584, 588 (La. 1976). Except for allegations directed at the knowing, voluntary, and intelligent nature of the plea, all other objections are waived and not reviewable. These threshold questions should be addressed at the outset by trial courts when considering a petition for postconviction relief filed by a party who pled guilty. Here, defendant's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel do not concern the validity of his plea and raise no jurisdictional defects in the proceeding. For those reasons, the petition is not subject to further judicial review and was properly denied.

Hughes, J., would grant and order an evidentiary hearing. Crain, J., concurs and assigns reasons.