State ex rel. Scott v. State

ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST FELICIANA PER CURIAM: | ] Denied. Relator fails 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). ‘ Relator 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 limita^-tions 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 succéssive filings mandatory. Relator’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 application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam. ■