STATE EX REL. DEMOND CAREY
STATE OF LOUISIANA
SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF CADDO
Relator fails to show 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). Furthermore, relator's challenge to the
sufficiency of the evidence was fully litigated on direct
review and therefore barred by La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(A).
See State v. Carey, 47, 650 (La.App. 2 Cir.
2/27/13), 110 So.3d 221, writ denied, 13-0726 (La.
11/1/13), 125 So.3d 417. We attach hereto and make a part
hereof the district court's written reasons denying
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 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.
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CADDO PARISH, LOUISIANA
272566 (SECTION 1)
October 27, 2011, Petitioner was convicted of Manslaughter.
On December 14, 2011, Petitioner was sentenced as a Second
Felony Habitual Offender to be confined for eighty (80) years
at hard labor. He was subsequently committed to the Louisiana
Department of Corrections, subject to the conditions provided
by law. The Court ordered that Petitioner's sentence be
served without the benefit of probation, parole, or
suspension of sentence. The Court also informed Petitioner of
his right to post-conviction relief proceedings. On February
27, 2013, the Second Circuit Court Appeal affirmed
Petitioner's conviction and sentence. State v.
Carey, 47, 650 (La.App. 2d Cir. 2/27/13), 110 So.3cl
this Court has for its consideration Petitioner's
Application for Post-conviction Relief, filed on February 6,
2014. On December 17, 2015, the Second Circuit Court of
Appeals issued a Writ of Mandamus for an Application
purportedly filed by Petitioner on January 30, 2014. There is
no record of an application being filed on January 30, 2014;
however, it appears that Petitioner's February 6, 2014,
application is outstanding. For to following reasons,
Petitioner Application for Post-Conviction Relief, filed on
February 6, 2014, is DENIED.
Petitioner's Application, he argues that he received
ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, Petitioner
argues that his defense counsel failed to adequately
investigate the crime. He further argues that counsel failed
to interview certain parties that may have been able to
provide exculpatory evidence.
succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim,
Petitioner must first satisfy the test set forth by the
United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington,
466 U.S. 668 (1984). Petitioner must show that
counsel's performance was deficient, that the deficiency
prejudiced him, and that counsel's error was so serious
that it violated Petitioner's right to effective
assistance of counsel as guaranteed by tire Sixth Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution. Id. at 686. The Petitioner
must prove actual prejudice before relief will be granted. It
is not sufficient for the Petitioner to show the error had
some conceivable effect on the outcome of the proceedings.
Rather, he must show that but for counsel's
unprofessional errors, there is a ...