Background
Lacal Lucky Wilson sought supervisory review of proceedings in the 22nd Judicial District Court for St. Tammany Parish, where the underlying matter was docketed as No. 374567.
Wilson alleged that his constitutional and due-process rights were violated during his criminal and habitual-offender proceedings. The appellate court characterized those allegations as a request for postconviction relief.
The Court’s Holding
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit denied Wilson’s writ application. It explained that when an inmate files a pleading requesting postconviction relief, the court must treat the pleading as such, including by applying the time limit in Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 930.8.
Under article 930.8(A), an application generally may not be considered when filed more than two years after the conviction and sentence became final under articles 914 or 922, unless a statutory exception applies. The court cited State v. Jarrow, 2004-0483 (La. 9/24/04), 882 So. 2d 1160, for the rule that a pleading seeking postconviction relief must be treated according to its substance.
Key Takeaways
- Constitutional and due-process challenges to criminal and habitual-offender proceedings may constitute requests for postconviction relief.
- A court looks to the substance of an inmate’s pleading when determining whether postconviction procedures apply.
- Louisiana’s two-year postconviction filing limit applies unless the applicant establishes an exception under article 930.8.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that relabeling constitutional challenges does not avoid Louisiana’s postconviction-relief framework. Attorneys must assess finality and article 930.8’s deadline when presenting collateral challenges to a conviction, sentence, or habitual-offender proceeding.