State Of Louisiana v. Brian Anthony Scott

Supreme Court of Louisiana
November 10, 2021
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
BRIAN ANTHONY SCOTT
No. 2021-KH-01219
_ _ _ _
_ _
IN R
E: Brian Anthony Scott - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 601902, Court of
Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2021 KW 0398;
_ _ _ _ _ _
November 10, 2021
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
We
imer, C. J., recused.
JBM
SJC
JTG
WJC
PDG
11/10/2021 "See News Release 044 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

* Weimer, C.J. recused
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 21-KH-1219
STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
BRIAN ANTHONY SCOTT
ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRTY-SECOND
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF TERREBONNE
PER CURIAM:*
Denied. Applicant does not i dentify 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.
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. Appl icant’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
11/10/21

2

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.