03/16/2020 “See News Release 010 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 19-KH-1283
STA
TE OF LOUISIANA
v.
ANT
ONIO CUMMINGS
O
N SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO
PE
R CURIAM:
D
enied. 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). As to his remaining claims,
applicant fails to satisfy his post-conviction burden of proof. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.2.
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 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 procedura l 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.