The Louisiana Supreme Court on Tuesday (Feb. 4) declined to revisit rapper Corey “C-Murder” Miller’s decades-long challenge to his second-degree murder conviction. It was ruled that Miller, 54, has exhausted his available state remedies and failed to meet the standard for further post-conviction review.
C-Murder is serving a life sentence without parole for the 2002 fatal shooting of 16-year-old Steven Thomas at a Harvey, Louisiana, nightclub. A jury convicted the hip-hop star in 2009, concluding he fired the fatal shots during a crowded event. C-Murder has consistently maintained his innocence.
The court’s latest action follows a long procedural history. Louisiana appellate courts affirmed the former No Limit Soldiers’ conviction in 2011, and the state Supreme Court upheld that decision in 2012. Since then, the rapper has filed multiple applications for post-conviction relief, all of which have been denied.
In his most recent filing, Master P’s brother argued that new considerations warranted reopening his case. He pointed to the recantation of testimony by two prosecution witnesses and raised concerns about the handling and interpretation of DNA evidence during the investigation. His attorneys argued these issues undermined the fairness of the trial and justified either a new evidentiary hearing or a retrial.
Corey “C-Murder” Miller’s Last Appeal Denied By Louisiana Supreme Court
The justices were unpersuaded. In a short order issued Tuesday, all seven members of the Louisiana Supreme Court voted unanimously to reject the application.
“Applicant has previously exhausted his right to state collateral review and fails to show that any exception permits his successive filing,” the court wrote.
The ruling effectively forecloses further relief in state court. Louisiana law places strict limits on successive post-conviction filings.
Louisiana requires defendants to demonstrate narrow statutory exceptions or newly discovered evidence meeting a high legal threshold. Courts have repeatedly held that witness recantations and generalized evidentiary disputes, without independent corroboration, are insufficient.
Miller’s case has drawn sustained public attention. Supporters have long argued the conviction relied on unreliable testimony, while prosecutors and courts have maintained the verdict was supported by the trial record.
With the Supreme Court’s decision, Miller’s life sentence remains intact. Any future challenge would likely have to proceed in federal court, where habeas standards impose similarly demanding barriers.
For now, the state judiciary has signaled that Miller’s post-conviction claims have reached their end.
Leave a Reply