Clerk of Court For the Court State Of Louisiana v. Wyatt Morgan

The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
Clerk of Court
For the Court
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
WYATT MORGAN
No.2020-KH-00849
_ _ _ _ _ _
IN RE: Wyatt Morgan - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of Franklin, 5th Judicial District Court Number(s) 2007 -422F, Court of
Appeal, Second Circuit, Number(s) 53,641-KH;
_ _ _ _ _ _
November 04, 2020
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
WJC
JLW
JDH
SJC
JTG
JHB
Supreme Court of Louisiana
November 04, 2020
11/04/2020 "See News Release 042 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

11/04/20
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 20-KH-0849
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
W
YATT MORGAN
O
N SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIFTH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF FRANKLIN
PE
R CURIAM:
D
enied. Applicant does not identify an illegal term in his sentence, and
therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction
relief. See State v. Parker , 98 -0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. As such, it is
subject to the time limitation set forth in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. The application was
not timely filed in the district court, and applicant fails to carry his burden to show
that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State , 93-
2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. Applic ant also fails to show that the state
withheld material exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373
U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963).
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

2

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.