Preview:

Supreme Court of Louisiana
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE #006

FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

The Opinions handed down on the 28th day of January, 2011, are as follows:

BY JOHNSON, J.:

2009-KK-1358

STATE OF LOUISIANA v. VINCENT M. CASTILLO (Parish of Jefferson) Retired Judge Philip C. Ciaccio, assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Chief Justice Catherine D. Kimball. For the reasons assigned, we reverse the decision of the court of appeal, which ordered appointment of counsel in a case involving discretionary review of petty misdemeanor traffic offenses. We find no mandate in the Louisiana or United States Constitutions requiring the State to provide counsel in these cases. We recognize the Supreme Court's holding in Halbert v. Michigan, supra, but find that the facts of this case necessarily distinguish it from Halbert, and support a different result. REVERSED. VICTORY, J., concurs in result. KNOLL, J., concurs in the result. WEIMER, J., concurs in the result.

1

01/28/11 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA No. 09-KK-1358 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS VINCENT M. CASTILLO On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson JOHNSON, Justice* We granted certiorari in this case to determine whether the State is required to provide counsel to an indigent defendant to assist in the preparation of an application for discretionary writ review following convictions for misdemeanor traffic violations. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, which ordered appointment of counsel. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Vincent M. Castillo ("Castillo") was charged in First Parish Court of Jefferson Parish with speeding, in violation of La. R.S. 32:63 (A); driving with a suspended driver's license, in violation of La. R.S. 32:415; and driving with an expired license, in violation of La. R.S. 32:412. Castillo was represented at trial by appointed counsel from the Jefferson Parish Indigent Defender Board ("Board"). He was found guilty on all charges on January 4, 2008, and ordered to pay fines totaling $275.00, a sentence of thirty (30) days in parish prison, suspended, and six months of inactive probation. Castillo, acting pro se, twice moved the Parish Court

Retired Judge Philip C. Ciaccio, assigned as Justice ad hoc, sitting for Chief Justice Catherine D. Kimball. 1

*

for review of his convictions, and requested the assistance of counsel for the preparation of his writ application. These requests were denied by the Parish Court. The Court of Appeal ordered that counsel be assigned following a showing by Castillo that he was indigent.1 Citing Williams v. Oklahoma, 395 U.S. 458, 89 S. Ct. 1818, 23 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1969) (per curiam), and Mayer v. Chicago, 404 U.S. 189, 92 S. Ct. 410, 415 30 L. Ed. 2d 372 (1971), the appellate panel concluded that the holdings in Williams and Mayer, read in conjunction with the Equal Protection Clause, mandated appointment of counsel for review of defendant's misdemeanor convictions. On remand, the Parish Court ordered the Board to represent Mr. Castillo. The Board sought review of this order, arguing that there is no legislative or constitutional mandate requiring appointment of counsel from a conviction where a discretionary application for writ review is the only avenue for relief. The court of appeal denied the writ application, finding no basis to depart from its earlier ruling.2 The Board sought a supervisory writ from this Court, which we granted.3 This Court appointed the Law Clinic at the Louisiana State University Law Center ("Law Clinic") to represent Castillo. When the students from the Law Clinic met with Castillo, he refused their representation. The Law Clinic, thereafter, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, and requested permission to file an amicus curiae brief to assist the Court in evaluating this writ application. DISCUSSION

1

State v. Castillo, 08-KH-1172 (La. App. 5 Cir. 01/28/09), unpub., (Castillo, I). State v. Castillo, 09-0291 (La. App. 5 Cir. 5/29/09), unpub., (Castillo II). State v. Castillo, 09-1358 (La. 6/18/09), 21 So. 3d 296. 2

2

3

First, we find the court of appeal's initial reliance on Williams and Mayer as the mandate for appointment of counsel is misplaced. Neither Williams nor Mayer addressed the issue of the right to appointed counsel post-verdict. Rather, these cases considered whether those defendants should be provided transcripts of the trial proceedings at the public's expense for their appeal. We must determine whether Louisiana or federal law provides a basis for support of the lower courts' actions. In Louisiana, a criminal defendant only has a right of direct appeal from his conviction if his case is triable by a jury. La. Const. Art. V,

Download 2009-KK-1358 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. VINCENT M. CASTILLO.pdf

Louisiana Law