State Of Louisiana v. Jarrett Jean Mccasland

Supreme Court of Louisiana
December 21, 2021
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
JARRETT JEAN MCCASLAND
No. 2021-KP-01141
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Jarrett J. McCasland - Applicant Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Number(s) 11- 13-0359,
Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2021 KW 0385;
_ _ _ _ _ _
December 21, 2021
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
Hughes, J., would grant to order an evidentiary hearing.
Griffin, J., would grant to order an evidentiary hearing.
JLW
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
12/21/2021 "See News Release 051 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 21-KP-1141
STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
JARRETT JEAN McCAUSLAND
ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE NINETEENTH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE
PER CURIAM:
Denied. Applicant fail s to show that he 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 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). 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 ap plication 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 f ully 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
12/21/21

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.