State Ex Rel. Melinie v. State Case Brief

State Ex Rel. Melinie v. State

665 So. 2d 1172 | 1996 La. LEXIS 168 | 1996 WL 15590

Full access

Unlock the video and quiz

The written brief is free to read below. Subscribe to watch the video explainer and take the quiz.

Takeaway

In short, Melinie establishes that Louisiana post-conviction procedure is not a vehicle for challenging a sentence as excessive or for raising ordinary sentencing errors, because article 930.3 does not authorize those claims.

Background

Vandyke Melinie sought post-conviction relief on the ground that his sentence was excessive. The opinion does not describe the underlying offense, sentence, or the lower court's disposition in detail.

The Louisiana Supreme Court granted Melinie's application to resolve definitively whether a prisoner may use a post-conviction application to challenge a sentence as excessive or otherwise erroneous.

Issues

Issue #1

Whether a defendant may raise an excessive-sentence claim in an application for post-conviction relief.

Holding

No. A claim that a sentence is excessive is not a cognizable ground for post-conviction relief under Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 930.3.

Reasoning

Article 930.3 supplies the exclusive grounds on which Louisiana courts may grant post-conviction relief. The court read that exclusive list as containing no ground that permits review of a claim that a sentence is excessive.

The court also concluded that other sentencing-error claims likewise fall outside article 930.3's authorized grounds for post-conviction review. It relied on State v. Gibbs and cited State ex rel. Glover as consistent authority concerning the limited scope of post-conviction relief.

Because Melinie's sole asserted basis for post-conviction relief was the alleged excessiveness of his sentence, the claim did not state a ground on which post-conviction relief could be granted. The court therefore denied relief.