156 So. 3d 1168
La.2015Background
- Relator pleaded guilty to three felonies on the same day in 1993; one predicate offense was simple possession of cocaine.
- At the time of the offenses and at sentencing (2004), Louisiana jurisprudence treated multiple convictions entered on the same date as a single conviction for habitual-offender sentencing (Jackson → Mims line).
- This Court in State v. Johnson (2004) departed from that rule, holding same-day convictions may count as multiple convictions for La. R.S. 15:529.1.
- The court of appeal applied Johnson to affirm relator’s adjudication as a fourth offender and the life sentence, though it remanded for guideline-based resentencing.
- The Louisiana Legislature amended La. R.S. 15:529.1(B) in 2005 to provide that multiple convictions obtained on the same day prior to October 19, 2004, shall be counted as one conviction, effectively nullifying Johnson’s retroactive effect.
- The Supreme Court granted relief, holding relator’s life sentence (as a fourth offender) violated fair‑warning/ex post facto principles and was illegal; vacated and remanded for resentencing as a third felony offender.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Johnson’s change (counting same‑day convictions separately) applied to relator and increased punishment retroactively | Johnson’s rule produced an unexpected, harsher classification (fourth offender) that relator could not have foreseen at the time of his 1993 offense | Johnson was a valid judicial interpretation and applied by the courts to relator’s case | Court held Johnson’s change implicated notice/fair‑warning and ex post facto concerns for relator and could not increase his punishment retroactively |
| Whether multiple convictions entered on same day in 1993 should count as one for habitual‑offender status | Relator: same‑day convictions must be treated as one conviction for offender‑status calculation (pre‑Johnson jurisprudence and legislative intent) | State: under Johnson, same‑day convictions may be multiple and can increase offender status | Held that for offenses committed before Oct. 19, 2004, same‑day convictions count as one conviction; relator must be treated as a third offender |
| Whether relator can obtain post‑conviction relief after finality based on ex post facto/due process grounds | Relator: judicial change that increased punishment is cognizable under La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3(6) (ex post facto) and permits collateral relief | State: sentencing errors generally not cognizable post‑conviction; timeliness/repetition objections (dissent) | Held relief is available: relator’s claim fits art. 930.3(6) and collateral attack under art. 882 because the sentence was illegal beyond what law allowed at offense time |
| Whether the sentence is illegal and subject to vacatur and resentencing | Relator: life sentence as fourth offender exceeded punishment authorized by law at time of offense and was thus illegal | State: original sentencing and appellate process upheld adjudication (but applied Johnson) | Held sentence vacated and case remanded for resentencing as a third felony offender |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Mims v. Butler, 601 So.2d 649 (La. 1992) (recognized same‑day convictions count as one for habitual‑offender purposes)
- State ex rel. Jackson v. Henderson, 283 So.2d 210 (La. 1973) (origin of the same‑day‑convictions rule)
- State v. Johnson, 884 So.2d 568 (La. 2004) (held same‑day convictions may count separately for La. R.S. 15:529.1)
- Rogers v. Tennessee, 532 U.S. 451 (2001) (due process/notice limits on retroactive judicial changes in law)
- State v. Siegel, 354 So.2d 525 (La. 1978) (sentence illegal where prior conviction improperly used to enhance punishment)