SLS 25RS-305 ORIGINAL
2025 Regular Session
SENATE BILL NO. 218
BY SENATOR DUPLESSIS
Prefiled pursuant to Article III, Section 2(A)(4)(b)(i) of the Constitution of Louisiana.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Provides relative to post conviction relief for defendants
convicted by a non-unanimous jury verdict. (8/1/25)
1 AN ACT
2 To amend and reenact Code of Criminal Procedure Arts. 930.4(G) and 930.8(E) and to enact
3 Code of Criminal Procedure Arts. 930.3(9), 930.4(H), and 930.8(A)(7), relative to
4 post conviction relief; to provide relative to applications for post conviction relief
5 based upon a conviction obtained by a non-unanimous jury verdict; to provide
6 relative to grounds for relief; to provide relative to repetitive applications for relief;
7 to provide relative to time limitations; and to provide for related matters.
8 Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:
9 Section 1. Code of Criminal Procedure Arts. 930.4(G) and 930.8(E) are hereby
10 amended and reenacted and Code of Criminal Procedure Articles 930.3(9), 930.4(H), and
11 930.8(A)(7) are hereby enacted to read as follows:
12 Art. 930.3. Grounds
13 If the petitioner is in custody after sentence for conviction for an offense,
14 relief shall be granted only on the following grounds:
15 * * *
16 (9) The conviction was obtained by a non-unanimous jury verdict.
17 Art. 930.4. Repetitive applications
Page 1 of 4
Coding: Words which are struck through are deletions from existing law;
words in boldface type and underscored are additions. SB NO. 218
SLS 25RS-305 ORIGINAL
1 * * *
2 G. All Except as provided in Paragraph H of this Article, all of the
3 limitations set forth in this Article shall be jurisdictional and shall not be waived or
4 excused by the court or the district attorney.
5 H. Notwithstanding any provision of this Code to the contrary, an
6 application for post conviction relief alleging that the petitioner's conviction was
7 obtained by a non-unanimous jury verdict shall not be considered repetitive nor
8 barred by any provision of this Article.
9 * * *
10 Art. 930.8. Time limitations; exceptions; prejudicial delay
11 A. No application for post conviction relief, including applications which
12 seek an out-of-time appeal, shall be considered if it is filed more than two years after
13 the judgment of conviction and sentence has become final under the provisions of
14 Article 914 or 922, unless any of the following apply:
15 * * *
16 (7) The petitioner's conviction was obtained by a non-unanimous jury
17 verdict.
18 * * *
19 E. All Except as provided in Subparagraph (A)(7) of this Article, all of
20 the limitations set forth in this Article shall be jurisdictional and shall not be waived
21 or excused by the court or the district attorney.
The original instrument and the following digest, which constitutes no part
of the legislative instrument, were prepared by Senate Legislative Services.
The keyword, summary, and digest do not constitute part of the law or proof
or indicia of legislative intent. [R.S. 1:13(B) and 24:177(E)]
DIGEST
SB 218 Original 2025 Regular Session Duplessis
Present law provides relative to post conviction relief. Present law provides that if the
petitioner is in custody after sentence for conviction for an offense, relief will be granted
only on the following grounds:
(1) The conviction was obtained in violation of the U.S. or La. Constitution.
(2) The court exceeded its jurisdiction.
Page 2 of 4
Coding: Words which are struck through are deletions from existing law;
words in boldface type and underscored are additions. SB NO. 218
SLS 25RS-305 ORIGINAL
(3) The conviction or sentence subjected him to double jeopardy.
(4) The limitations on the institution of prosecution had expired.
(5) The statute creating the offense for which he was convicted and sentenced is
unconstitutional.
(6) The conviction or sentence constitutes the ex post facto application of law in
violation of the U.S. or La. Constitution.
(7) The petitioner is determined by clear and convincing DNA or other evidence to be
factually innocent.
Proposed law retains present law and makes a conviction obtained by a non-unanimous jury
verdict a ground for post conviction relief.
Present law provides that, unless required in the interest of justice, any claim for relief that
was fully litigated in an appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence will not be
considered. Present law further provides that the court will deny relief if the application
alleges a claim knew about but inexcusably failed to raise in the proceedings leading to
conviction, or if the application alleges a claim that the petitioner raised in the trial court but
inexcusably failed to pursue on appeal. Present law further provides that successive
applications will be dismissed if they fail to raise a new claim or raise a new claim that was
inexcusably omitted from a prior application. Present law further provides that if the court
considers dismissing an application for failure to raise the claim previously, the court will
order the petitioner to state reasons for the failure, and if the court finds that the failure was
excusable, it will consider the merits of the claim.
Present law provides that any attempt or request by a petitioner to supplement or amend the
application shall be subject to all of the limitations and restrictions set forth in present law.
Present law requires that, in addition to serving the district attorney for the jurisdiction where
the underlying conviction was obtained, any application filed after the first application for
post conviction relief be served on the district attorney and the attorney general at least 60
days in advance of the hearing on the application. Both the district attorney and the attorney
general have a right to suspensively appeal any order granting relief.
Present law provides any of the limitations set forth in present law are jurisdictional and
prohibits the court or the district attorney from waiving or excusing those limitations.
Proposed law provides an exception to the prohibition against waiver or excusing limitations
as it applies to applications where the conviction was obtained by a non-unanimous jury
verdict.
Present law provides that an application for post conviction relief, including applications
which seek an out-of-time appeal, will not be considered if it is filed more than two years
after the judgment of conviction and sentence has become final unless any of the following
apply:
(1) The application alleges, and the petitioner proves or the state admits, that the facts
upon which the claim is predicated were not known to the petitioner or his prior
attorneys, subject to certain conditions.
(2) The claim asserted in the petition is based upon a final ruling of an appellate court
establishing a theretofore unknown interpretation of constitutional law and the
petitioner establishes that this interpretation is retroactively applicable to his case,
and the petition is filed within one year of the finality of such ruling.
Page 3 of 4
Coding: Words which are struck through are deletions from existing law;
words in boldface type and underscored are additions. SB NO. 218
SLS 25RS-305 ORIGINAL
(3) The application would already be barred by the provisions of present law but the
application is filed on or before October 1, 2001, and the date on which the
application was filed is within three years after the judgment of conviction and
sentence has become final.
(4) The person asserting the claim has been sentenced to death.
(5) The petitioner qualifies for certain present law exceptions to timeliness based upon
DNA testing or factual innocence.
Present law provides any of the limitations set forth in present law are jurisdictional and
prohibits the court or the district attorney from waiving or excusing those limitations.
Proposed law provides an exception to the prohibition against waiver or excusing limitations
as it applies to applications where the conviction was obtained by a non-unanimous jury
verdict.
Effective August 1, 2025.
(Amends C.Cr.P. Arts. 930.4(G) and 930.8(E); adds C.Cr.P. Arts. 930.3(9), 930.4(H), and
930.8(A)(7))
Page 4 of 4
Coding: Words which are struck through are deletions from existing law;
words in boldface type and underscored are additions.