Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Stephens v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided March 4, 2016No. 2015-KH-2340PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam 1

hDenied. Relator’s sentencing claim is 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. We attach hereto and make a part hereof the District Court’s written reasons denying relator’s motion to correct illegal sentence.

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…

Also in this document: Per curiam 2.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Melinie v. StateSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
  2. State v. CottonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
  3. State v. StephensLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2013

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. StephensSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API