Lilly v. State
2012 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 571
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2012Background
- Lilly, inmate, charged with two counts of assault on a public servant, arraigned at the Unit chapel (branch courthouse).
- Lilly moved to transfer proceedings to the public county courthouse; motion was denied after a joint hearing.
- Lilly pled guilty in a bench trial under a plea bargain and was sentenced to six years.
- Court of Appeals held trial not open to the public, Establishment Clause violation harmless; no reversal.
- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted discretionary review to address openness and Establishment Clause issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Lilly's trial closed to the public? | Lilly proved closure via Unit admittance policies. | State argued openness or inconclusive evidence of closure. | Trial was closed; court reversed and remanded for new trial. |
| Who closed the proceedings? | Closure occurred due to the trial court moving to the Unit. | State contends not responsible for closure decisions. | Trial court closed proceedings and bore the justification burden. |
| Was the closure justified under Waller? | Trial court failed to make specific findings supporting closure. | Not specifically addressed; limited to arguments on openness. | Closure unjustified; reversal and remand for new trial. |
| Did Lilly waive his Sixth Amendment public-trial claim? | Record shows preservation and right to appeal; not waived. | Plea documents and open-court acknowledgment indicated waiver. | Waiver not shown; claim preserved for merits. |
Key Cases Cited
- Presley v. Georgia, 130 S. Ct. 721 (2010) (public-trial presumption; requires specific findings for closure)
- Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (1984) (presumption of openness; closure must be justified with findings)
- Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court for Norfolk County, 457 U.S. 596 (1982) (sua sponte closure; justify with alternatives)
- Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 464 U.S. 501 (1984) (scope of closure and necessity )
- Purvis v. Georgia, 708 S.E.2d 283 (2011) (trial court's control over access; need justification)
- Steadman v. State, 360 S.W.3d 499 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (requires consideration of alternatives to closure)
- In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257 (1948) (public trial as general rule; openness benefits)
- Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, Inc., 433 U.S. 119 (1977) (prison setting and public access considerations)
- Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980) (presumption of openness in criminal trials)
- Presley v. Georgia, 130 S. Ct. 721 (2010) (reiterated)