2020-KH-01107 Precedential Writ application denied. Processed

State Of Louisiana v. Deidre Antoinette Pierre

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed December 8, 2020

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Opinion text

Supreme Court of Louisiana
December 08, 2020
Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
DEIDRE ANTOINETTE PIERRE
No.2020-KH-01107
_ _ _ _
_ _
IN R
E: Deidre Pierre - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish
of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Number(s) 79255, Court of Appeal, Third
Circuit, Number(s) KH 19-00219;
_ _ _ _ _ _
December 08, 2020
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
SJC
BJJ
JLW
JDH
JTG
WJC
JBM
12/08/2020 “See News Release 047 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”

12/08/20
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 20-KH-1107
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
DE
IDRE ANTOINETTE PIERRE
O
N SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIFTEENTH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF LAFAYETTE
PE
R CURIAM:
D
enied. Applicant does not identify an illegal term in her sentence, and
therefore, her 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. Applicant fails to
show that she 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).
Applicant has now fully litigated her application for post-conviction relief in
state court. Similar to federal habeas re lief, 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 she can
show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive
application applies, applicant has exhausted her right to state collateral review. The
district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.