State Of Louisiana v. Eddie Matthews, III

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2025 KW 0805 VERSUS EDDIE JOSEPH MATTHEWS, III OCTOBER 6, 2025 In Re: Eddie Joseph Matthews, III, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 553826.

BEFORE : McCLENDON, C.J., GREENE AND STROMBERG, JJ.

WRIT DENIED. It is well-settled that the law in effect at the time of the offense is determinative of a defendant’s punishment, including for habitual offender proceedings. See State v. Lyles, 2019-00203 (La. 10/22/19), 286 So.3d 407, 409 (per curiam) (citing State v. Parker, 2003-0924 (La. 4/14/04), 871 So.2d 317, 327). In State v. Johnson, 2003-2993 (La. 10/19/04), 884 So.2d 568, 578, superseded by statute on other grounds, Butler v. Cain, 327 Fed.Appx. 455 (5th Cir. 2009), the Louisiana Supreme Court expressly overruled its prior decision in Mims and held that Act 688 of 1982 removed the sequential requirement of La. R.S.

15:529.1. The record shows that the felony being enhanced in this 2014 case, which was possession of methamphetamine, was committed after the predicate convictions set forth in the multiple offender bill of information. See La. R.S. 15:529.1(B). Furthermore, the district court correctly applied the ten-year cleansing period to compute the cleansing period in this case. Accordingly, the district court did not err by dismissing the motion to correct an illegal habitual offender sentence.

PMc HG TPS ~CQURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT FOR THE COURT