State Of Louisiana v. Aaron Kitzler

Supreme Court of Louisiana
March 02, 2022
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
AARON KITZLER
No. 2021-KH-01824
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Aaron Kitzler - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish
of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 13 -CR8-122103, Court of
Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2021 KW 0780;
_ _ _ _ _ _
March 02, 2022
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
Hughes, J., would grant and order evidentiary hearing.
Griffin, J., would grant.
JBM
JLW
SJC
JTG
WJC
03/02/2022 "See News Release 010 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

03/02/2022
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
N
o. 21-KH-1824
STA
TE OF LOUISIANA
v.
AARON KITZLER
ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-SECOND
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF WASHINGTON
PER
CURIAM:
Denied. Applicant fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of
co
unsel under the standard of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct.
2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Applicant also fails to show that the state withheld
m
aterial exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83
S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). As to his remaining claims, he fails to meet his
post- conviction burden of proof and/or the claims are repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. arts.
930.2, 930.4.
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
s
uccessive 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

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.