Provides relative to post-conviction relief or parole when a verdict is rendered by a non-unanimous jury

House Bill 219 creates Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.12 to permit defendants convicted by non-unanimous jury verdicts to seek judicial review and resentencing. The statute establishes a new post-conviction remedy allowing defendants to file motions for resentencing in the district court where conviction occurred, with a filing deadline of August 1, 2027. Upon finding that a defendant was convicted of a felony by non-unanimous verdict and remains under sentence, the court must schedule a resentencing hearing within sixty days. The statute allows courts to vacate sentences and impose new sentences in lieu of the original judgment, deviating from the normal restrictions in Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.4(D). The law implements a rebuttable presumption that sentences not exceeding the maximum term for the most serious lesser included offense are proper, which the district attorney may rebut only through clear and convincing evidence that a sentence up to one and one-half times that maximum is warranted and not excessive.

The statute affects inmates and parolees convicted by non-unanimous jury verdicts in felony cases who are still serving sentences, excluding only those who have fully completed their sentences. District attorneys must be provided thirty days to file oppositions and may oppose resentencing at the hearing. Victims must receive notice at least thirty days before the hearing and retain rights to attend and submit impact statements. Defense counsel and convicted defendants gain an opportunity to present evidence at a full resentencing hearing where courts must impose individually tailored sentences rather than the original convictions. The legislation directly impacts Louisiana's district courts, which must manage these proceedings and conduct resentencing hearings. Defendants receive full credit for time already served and may gain parole eligibility determinations at the court's discretion, while enhanced sentences as habitual offenders cannot be applied to sentences imposed under this article.

This statute operates within the framework established by the Louisiana Supreme Court's decision in State v. Reddick, which recognized that non-unanimous jury verdicts violate constitutional protections but determined that the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Ramos v. Louisiana does not apply retroactively on state post-conviction review. By enacting this statute, the legislature exercises its recognized authority to establish a broader class of individuals eligible for post-conviction review, as noted by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The new article interacts with existing Code of Criminal Procedure provisions governing post-conviction relief, particularly Article 930.4, which normally restricts sentence modification authority. The statute also references Code of Criminal Procedure Article 814 regarding responsive verdicts and lesser included offenses, creating substantive connections to Louisiana's verdict and sentencing framework. The article's establishment of rebuttable presumptions regarding sentence proportionality and its prohibition on enhancement of sentences as habitual offender convictions create specific limitations on prosecutorial and judicial sentencing discretion that differ from standard resentencing procedures.