Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State ex rel. Sneeze v. State
Citations: 186 So. 3d 654; 2016 La. LEXIS 574; 2016 WL 1050467Docket: No. 2016-KH-0175
Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; March 14, 2016; Louisiana; State Supreme Court
Writ not considered due to untimely filing under La.S.Ct. Rule X. 5. The relator has exhausted his right to post-conviction relief in state court. Louisiana's post-conviction procedure, akin to federal habeas relief (28 U.S.C. 2244), allows a second or successive application only under specific narrow circumstances as outlined in La. C.Cr. P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations set by La. C.Cr. P. art. 930.8. The 2013 amendment to La. C.Cr. P. art. 930.8 established mandatory procedural bars against successive filings. The relator's previous application for post-conviction relief was denied by the District Court, which now stands as final. The relator may only pursue successive applications if he can demonstrate that one of the limited exceptions applies. The District Court is instructed to record a minute entry reflecting this ruling.