2019-KH-01947 Precedential Writ application denied. Processed

State Of Louisiana v. Regis Re'mone Chatman

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed January 12, 2021

Opinion text

Supreme Court of Louisiana
January 12, 2021
Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
REGIS RE'MONE CHATMAN
No.2019-KH-01947
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Regis Re'Mone Chatman - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory
Writ, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 538631, Court
of Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2019 KW 0810;
_ _ _ _ _ _
January 12, 2021
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
JLW
JDH
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
PDG
01/12/2021 “See News Release 001 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”

01/12/21
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 19-KH-1947
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
RE
GIS RE’MONE CHATMAN
O
N SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SECOND
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. TAMMANY
PE
R CURIAM:
De
nied. Applicant fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of
counsel 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. The application is also
repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4.
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 second or 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 procedural 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.