APPLICATION FOR WRITS DIRECTED TO CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT
ORLEANS PARISH NO. 514-235, SECTION "D" Honorable
Paul A Bonin, Judge
Antoine Green DOC #280380 Dixon Correctional Inst. PRO SE
A. Cannizzaro, Jr., District Attorney DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE, ORLEANS PARISH COUNSEL FOR STATE OF
composed of Judge Edwin A. Lombard, Judge Regina
Bartholomew-Woods, Judge Paula A. Brown
A. Brown, Judge.
This is a criminal matter. Relator, Antoine Green, seeks
supervisory review of the district court's November 13,
2018 judgment denying Relator's motion to correct illegal
sentence. For the following reasons, we grant Relator's
writ application and remand to the district court.
January 2013, Relator pled guilty to attempted first degree
murder and domestic abuse aggravated assault. According to
the docket master, Relator was sentenced, pursuant to the
plea agreement, to ten years at hard labor for attempted
first degree murder and five years at hard labor for domestic
abuse aggravated assault. The sentences were ordered to run
concurrently to each other. Additionally, the State agreed to
not file a multiple offender bill.
September 2014, Relator filed in the district court a
pleading entitled a Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence urging
his guilty plea entered for attempted first degree murder was
invalid because it was not knowingly and voluntarily entered.
Specifically, Relator alleged the State and his attorney
induced him to enter the guilty plea by leading him to
believe that he would not be sentenced as a multiple
offender; thus, he would be eligible to receive "good
time" credit toward his ten year at hard labor sentence
imposed for attempted first degree murder. Relator contended
the primary reason he agreed to enter the plea agreement was
receipt of the "good time" credits. Subsequently,
he discovered from the Louisiana Department of Corrections he
was ineligible to receive "good time" credits
toward his ten year sentence resulting in the filing of the
motion. Relator acknowledged that the remedies for a breach
of a plea agreement were (1) specific performance of the
agreement or (2) withdrawal of the guilty plea. Relator
prayed for re-sentencing from ten years at hard labor to
eight and one/half (8 1/2) years at hard labor, or in the
alternative, a hearing on the motion.
district court denied the motion and found: (1) the pleading
should be construed as an application for post-conviction
relief; (2) Relator's pleading was untimely filed under
La. C.Cr. P. art. 930.8; and (3) Relator waived review of
"all non-jurisdictional defects in the proceedings
leading up to the guilty plea" because Relator entered
an unconditional guilty plea.
writ application followed.
asserts the district court erred in denying his motion.
reviewing the record before this Court, we find the district
court correctly found Relator's motion should be
construed as an application for post-conviction relief.
See State v. Baham, 13-1069, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir.
9/10/14), 149 So.3d 1235, 1238 (citations omitted)(wherein
this Court held that the appropriate procedural vehicle to
challenge a guilty plea after sentencing is an application
for post-conviction relief.). However, the district court
improperly denied the claim as untimely filed pursuant to La.
C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Relator filed his claim in September
2014, well within the prescriptive period to seek
post-conviction relief as set forth in La. C.Cr.P. art.
930.8. Additionally, the district court mistakenly found that
Relator, by entering unconditional plea of guilty, waived
review of the claim challenging the validity of his plea
agreement. See State v. Crosby, 338 So.2d 584, 586
(La. 1976)(citations omitted)(wherein the Supreme ...