Clerk of Court For the Court State Of Louisiana v. Carlos Alberto Rodriguez
Clerk of Court For the Court State Of Louisiana v. Carlos Alberto Rodriguez, No. 2020-KH-00588 (La. Sept. 29, 2020).
Opinion text
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
Clerk of Court
For the Court
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
CARLOS ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ
No.2020-KH-00588
_ _ _ _ _ _
IN RE: Carlos Alberto Rodriguez - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory
Writ, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 465867-1, 1st
Circuit Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2019 KW 1619;
_ _ _ _ _ _
September 29, 2020
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
JLW
BJJ
JDH
SJC
JTG
WJC
JHB
Supreme Court of Louisiana
September 29, 2020
09/29/2020 "See News Release 035 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."
09/29/20
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 20-KH-0588
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
CARL
OS ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ
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.
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 sec ond 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 suc cessive
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.