STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MARK CAMBRICE (2023)

Writ application not considered. Not timely filed. See Louisiana Supreme Court Rule X, § 5(a).

I would consider the applicant's writ application and deny it on the merits. Specifically, this application fails to provide any evidence in support of the ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing claim (e.g., relevant transcripts or documentation showing that a downward departure pursuant to State v. Dorthey, 623 So. 2d 1276 (La. 1993), might have been appropriate). Because applicant has provided nothing for this Court to analyze in light of State v. Harris, 18-1012 (La. 7/9/20), 340 So. 3d 845, and subsequent cases, he falls woefully short of carrying his burden of proof on collateral review. See La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.2. See generally Harris, 340 So. 3d at 860-63 (Crichton, J., concurs and writes separately noting, inter alia, the “serious consequences that can result when a defendant is denied effective representation during sentencing”).

Crichton, J., dissents and assigns reasons.