From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex Rel. Melinie v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Jan 12, 1996
665 So. 2d 1172 (La. 1996)

Summary

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on Article 930.3, ruled that claims of errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not proper grounds for post-conviction relief. The court's holding in Cotton expanded the bars under La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.3 and Melinie to claims challenging the performance of counsel at multiple offender proceedings.

Summary of this case from Reavis v. Hedgeman

Opinion

No. 93-KH-1380.

January 12, 1996.


We grant the application in order to rule definitively on the issue of whether a person may raise the question of excessiveness of sentence in a post-conviction application. La. Code Crim.Proc. art. 930.3, which sets out the exclusive grounds for granting post-conviction relief, provides no basis for review of claims of excessiveness or other sentencing error post-conviction. See State v. Gibbs, 620 So.2d 296 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1993); cf. State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330, p. 7, 11-14 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189, 1194, 1196-98. Accordingly, relator's claim for post-conviction relief based on the excessiveness of his sentence is denied.


Summaries of

State ex Rel. Melinie v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Jan 12, 1996
665 So. 2d 1172 (La. 1996)

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on Article 930.3, ruled that claims of errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not proper grounds for post-conviction relief. The court's holding in Cotton expanded the bars under La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.3 and Melinie to claims challenging the performance of counsel at multiple offender proceedings.

Summary of this case from Reavis v. Hedgeman

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.3, ruled that claims of excessive sentence or errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not proper grounds for post conviction relief.

Summary of this case from Armstrong v. Cain

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on La. Code Crim. P. art. 930.3, ruled that claims of excessive sentence or errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not proper grounds for post-conviction relief.

Summary of this case from Williams v. Cain

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on La. Code Crim. P. Art. 930.3, ruled that claims of errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not proper grounds for post-conviction relief.

Summary of this case from Scott v. Cain

In Melinie, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3 sets forth the exclusive grounds for granting post-conviction relief and does not provide a basis for post-conviction review of sentencing errors. 665 So. 2d at *1.

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Andrews

In Melinie, supra, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that Article 930.3 provides no basis for review of claims of excessiveness or other sentencing errors post-conviction.

Summary of this case from Chester v. Cain

In Melinie, supra, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that article 930.3 provides no basis for review of claims of excessiveness or other sentencing errors post-conviction.

Summary of this case from Neal v. Kaylo

In Melinie, supra, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on article 930.3, ruled that claims of an excessive sentence or other sentencing errors which should be raised on direct appeal cannot be raised in state post-conviction proceedings.

Summary of this case from Leonard v. Hubert

In Melinie, supra, the Louisiana Supreme Court, relying on Article 930.3, ruled that claims of excessive sentence or errors in sentencing which should be raised on direct appeal were not grounds for post-conviction relief. Petitioner herein did not raise his claim challenging his sentencing as a multiple offender on direct appeal and therefore procedurally defaulted his sentencing claim in the state courts.

Summary of this case from Marshall v. Hubert

In State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172, the Supreme Court of Louisiana held that there is no review of excessiveness in post-conviction proceedings.

Summary of this case from State ex rel. Cook v. State

addressing claims for relief of excessiveness of sentence or other sentencing errors post-conviction

Summary of this case from State v. Hall

In State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La. 1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3, which sets out the exclusive grounds for granting post-conviction relief, provides no basis for review of claims of excessiveness of sentence or other sentencing errors post-conviction.

Summary of this case from State v. Bush
Case details for

State ex Rel. Melinie v. State

Case Details

Full title:STATE EX REL. VANDYKE MELINIE v. STATE OF LOUISIANA

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Jan 12, 1996

Citations

665 So. 2d 1172 (La. 1996)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Strain

4 of 4, La. S. Ct. Writ Application, 12-KH-2038, 9/13/12 (dated 9/10/12); St. Rec. Vol. 3 of 4, La. S. Ct.…

State v. Harris

In response, the state argues that it is irrelevant whether defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance…