Whether a defendant in a Louisiana state criminal case has a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in a first post-conviction proceeding to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel

No question identified. : le QUESUION PRESENTED 1). Whether a defendant in a state criminal case who is prohibited by state law trom raising on direct appeal any claim of inef'fective assistance of trial counsel, but who has a state right to raise such a claim in a first post conviction proceeding, has a federal constitutional right to quaranted assistance of first post conviction counsel specifically with respect to his inet'fective assistance of trial counsel claim. ? Whether King was denied a Constitutional right to counsel 7 The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and the parties addressed their arguments to this question inMartines v. Ryan, 132 S.Ct. 1309,566 (2012). The Court chose to not answer that question which avoided the Court's need to confront the established rule that there is no right to counsel in collateral pre~ ceedings. To avoid his procedural default, Martinez advocated in favor of an exception to this rule where the prisoner seeks the right to counsel in an initial review collateral proceeding. The court held: "Where under state law, inetfective assistance of counsel claims must be raised in an initial review collateral proceedings, a procedural default will not bar a federal habeas court from hearing those claims, if, in the initial review collateral proceeding there was no counsel or counsel in that proceeding was ineffective. The equitable ruling in Martineg does not protect defendants in Louisiana who have been stripped of a constitutional right to et'fective assistance of counsel on a claim of “inef'fective assistance of trial counsel". This is so because Courts in louisiana ignore the mandate set forth in Martineg, and do not automatically appoint counsel on a first collateral review for a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. . i ‘fhe UeS. Supreme Court held in Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 357, 83 S.Ct. 81k, 9 LeEd.2d 811 (1963) "that States must appoint counsel on a prisoner's first appeal. Where as here, the initial review collateral proceedings is the first desig: nated proceeding for a prisoner to raise a claim of ineffective assistance at : trial, the cotlatowal proeeceding is in many wavs the eqnivalent of a prisoner's direct appeal as to the ineffective assistance claim. Louisiana prisoner's may raise claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel only in state collateral proceedings, not on direct appeal. Defendant's in Louisiana have a Constitutional right to effective counsel on . direct appeal. Louisiana has removed from the direct appeal process claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, to the first collateral review (post conviction) where defendant's de not have a constitutional right to assistance of counsel, and where they are not appointed counsel unless they are able to satisfy the standards of the Gode of Criminal Procedure arte 930.7 which reads: A) It the petitioner is indigent and alleges a claim which, if : established would entitle him to relief, the court may appoint counsel. B) The court may appoint counsel for an indigent prisoner when it orders an Evidentiary Hearing, authorises the taking of depositions, or authorizes request for admissions of fact or genuineness of documents, when such evidence is necessary for the ; disposttion of precedural ohjections raised by the respondent. C) The court shall appoint counsel for an indigent petitioner when it orders an Evidentiary Hearing on the merits of a claim, or authorises the taking of depositions or request for admissions of fact or genuineness of documents for use as evidence in ruling upon the merits of the claim. It is respectfully argued that tor a defendant to meet the above cited requirements he needs assistance from an attorney. Without adequate representation in an iL ' initial review collateral proceeding, a defendant will have difficulties vindicating a substantial ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. , Gan the State of Louisiana be allowed to simply strip defendant's