2020-KH-00656 Precedential Writ application denied. Processed

Clerk of Court For the Court State Of Louisiana v. Calvin Bernard Jefferson

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed October 20, 2020

Opinion text

The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
Clerk of Court
For the Court
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
CALVIN BERNARD JEFFERSON
No.2020-KH-00656
_ _ _ _ _ _
IN RE: Calvin Bernard Jefferson - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory
Writ, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 521,289, 1st
Circuit Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2019 KW 1558;
_ _ _ _ _ _
October 20, 2020
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
JHB
BJJ
JLW
SJC
JTG
WJC
Hughes, J., would grant.
Supreme Court of Louisiana
October 20, 2020
10/20/2020 "See News Release 040 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

10/20/20
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 20-KH-0656
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
CAL
VIN BERNARD JEFFERSON
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 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 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 th at 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.