State ex rel. Stephens v. State
Supreme Court of Louisiana
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
- State Ex Rel. Melinie v. StateSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
- State v. CottonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
- State v. StephensLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2013
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. StephensSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2019