State Of Louisiana v. Eddie Lang

Supreme Court of Louisiana
September 19, 2023
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
EDDIE LANG
No. 2023-KH-00332
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Eddie Lang - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish
of West Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Number(s) 22- WCR-080, Court of
Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2022 KW 1167;
_ _ _ _ _ _
September 19, 2023
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
PDG
JLW
JDH
SJC
JTG
WJC
JBM
09/19/2023 "See News Release 040 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 23-KH-0332
STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
EDDIE LANG
ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF WEST FELICIANA
PER CURIAM:
Denied. 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; see State ex rel. Glover v. State , 93-2330, pp. 9 –11 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d
1189, 1195 –96 (distinguishing habeas corpus from po st-conviction relief and
endorsing La.C.Cr.P. art. 351 and its cmt. (c), which states that “habeas corpus is
not the proper procedural device for petitioners who may file applications for post
conviction relief;” rather, it “deals with pre -conviction compl aints concerning
custody.”).
Applicant has now fully litigated two applications 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 succe ssive
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,

2

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.