Lilly v. State
2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 1182
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Lilly was indicted on two counts of assault on a public servant and pleaded guilty after the court denied his motion to transfer to a public courthouse, receiving a six-year sentence.
- The hearings were scheduled and conducted in the chapel of the French Robertson Unit, a Texas prison, prompting Lilly to seek a public-trial transfer and raise First Amendment challenges.
- The French Robertson Unit in Jones County functioned as a designated branch courthouse; access required warden approval, security checks, and restricted visitors.
- The unit's heightened security and restricted access contrasted with courthouse procedures, raising concerns about public attendance and equal-protection implications.
- The trial court denied the transfer; Lilly pleaded guilty after a hearing on the transfer issue; the court certified the right to appeal pretrial rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the prison location violated the right to a public trial | Lilly argued prison venue denied public trial rights | State contends venue did not deprive public access given notice and potential attendance | First issue overruled |
| Whether holding proceedings in a chapel violated Establishment/Free Exercise Clauses | Lilly claimed Establishment/Free Exercise violations | State argued no standing or applicable difference; chapel use permissible | Second issue sustained as Establishment Clause violation; harmless error due to guilty plea. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U.S. 368 (U.S. 1979) (public-trial access vs. exclusion balance; no automatic exclusion for press)
- Adderley v. Florida, 385 U.S. 39 (U.S. 1966) (prison grounds not a public forum; security interests may restrict access)
- Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, 433 U.S. 119 (U.S. 1977) (prisons are not public forums; government may regulate access)
- Salazar v. Buono, 130 S. Ct. 1803 (S. Ct. 2010) (reasonable observer test for Establishment Clause context)
- Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (U.S. 1983) (legislative prayer permissible; contextual religious action varies by purpose)