State Of Louisiana v. Jerry Evans

Supreme Court of Louisiana
December 16, 2025
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
JERRY EVANS
No. 2025-KH-01220
_ _
_ _ _ _
IN
RE: Jerry Evans - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ, Parish
of Lincoln, 3rd Judicial District Court Number(s) 66,901, Court of Appeal, Second
Circuit, Number(s) 56,656-KH;
_ _ _ _ _ _
December 16, 2025
Writ application denied. See per curiam.
Griffin, J., would grant and order production of transcript.
McCallum, J., recused.
JLW
JDH
WJC
JMG
CRC
12/16/2025 "See News Release 055 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 25-KH-1220
STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
JERRY EVANS
ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRD
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF LINCOLN
PER CURIAM:
Denied. Applicant’s guilty plea waived all non -jurisdictional defects in the
proceedings leading to his conviction. State v. Crosby , 338 So.2d 584, 586 (La.
1976). Furthermore, applicant has not made a showing of particularized need by
filing an application which would fall under the exceptions of La.C.Cr.P. art.
930.8(A) and which needs the requested documents to support it. See State ex rel.
Fleury v. State, 93-2898 (La. 10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488.
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 manda tory. 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.