State of Louisiana Through Doug Moreau, District Attorney for the 19th Judicial District Court VS Vincent Mark Castillo
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2007 CE 1865 STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH DOUG MOREAU DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS VINCENT MARK CASTILLOU C Judgment 1 PPEi L d I 1ST Clf t Y FILEU Rendered 11 LUlJ On DC t I r r p vll l t JV j Appeal from the 19th Judicial District Court in and for the Parish of East Baton F Rou State of Louisiana District Court No 559 161 The Honorable l t l Kay Bates Judge Presiding Doug Moreau District Attorney J j1 f Counsel for Plaintiff Appellee State of Louisiana Mark D Pethke Baton La Rouge Vincent Mark Castillo Defendant St Rose La Appearing Pro BEFORE CARTER C J Appellant Se WHIPPLE PARRO KUHN GUIDRY PETTIGREW DOWNING GAIDRY McDONALD McCLENDON r 1 J1 jJCVI4I i CL HUGHES AJ ANI WELCH S C AI JJ ie s d c 17 fr7 H PER CURIAM This defendant IS election an appellant Vincent suit the challenging Mark Castillo as of eligibility candidate for the office of a Governor of the State of Louisiana FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mr Castillo filed of State seeking Louisiana in the September Baton 12 2007 that Mr Const art I S as petition objecting Castillo 10 from with the Louisiana as a Attorney for the to Mr Castillo convicted felon is After on October 4 received 15 an l 572B 4 2006 Mr automatic Mr s On Parish of East candidacy prohibited qualifying for the office he seeks 24th Judicial District Court Parish of Jefferson 2007 October 20 on The record establishes that in 2001 Mr Castillo attempted extortion Secretary candidate for Governor of the State of Moreau District Doug a a candidacy election to be held primary Rouge filed grounds notice of qualify to a on the under LSA 2 was convicted in the felonl of two counts of serving three years and ten months at hard labor Castillo discharged first Castillo has was offender not pardon sought nor from his sentence and pursuant to LSA R S has he received a pardon from the GovelTIOr for the State of Louisiana The appellate court shall sit en banc in all election contests involving candidates on throughout the state LSA R S 18 1409H 2 The district attorney has standing to bring an action objecting to the candidacy of a person he has reason to believe is a convicted felon prohibited fi om qualifying for for offices voted office pursuant to LSA mi I S 1 O LSA R S 18 495 3 In Louisimla a felony is defined as an offense that may be imprisonment at hard labor LSA C Cr P art 933 3 4 A first offender never previously convicted of a punished by felony shall be death or pardoned upon completion of his sentence without arecommendation ofthe Board of Pardons and without action by the governor LSA R S 15 1 572B emphasis automatically supplied 2 After a considering the Mr judgment declaring and casting 1 000 evidence and Castillo Castillo with Mr See LSA R S disqualified costs 18 495E the district testimony comi candidate for governor as a and attorney fees in the This signed expedited appeal by amount Mr of Castillo See LSA R S 18 1409F follows DISCUSSION As the facts of this resolution of no case are not in purely legal issue a special weight to the On duty to record of Baker School Bd Bd 99 2505 La review App LaCombe correct 8 30 04 East Baton v 887 So 2d 48 51 to is faced with the appellate a comi judgment Rouge 754 So 2d 291 gives 292 93 writ denied 04 1880 04 2240 La on the Parish School Appellate detennine whether the trial McKeithen v an of law and render questions simply court trial court but instead exercises its 1 Cir 2 18 00 review of questions of law is legally legal issues findings of the constitutional City dispute this La court App 1 was Cir 882 So 2d 9 2 04 588 Article I Section 10 B the Louisiana voters The a October 3 following 1 felony not 1998 appointment public office of honor trust pardoned Mr Castillo advanced several art or in approved by pertinent pmi permitted to qualify as or take profit in public elective this state A person who has been convicted within this state of and has and who has exhausted all legal remedies afterwards been LSA Const provides persons shall not be candidate for elective office or a on of the Louisiana Constitution I 910 910 conflicts with LSA by the govelTIOr of this state challenges to the constitutionality First Mr Castillo contends that LSA Const Const mi 1 920 which 3 art of I allows for restoration of the full rights of citizenship upon termination of state Mr conviction for any offense Const art I principles latest to hold of constitutional construction expression of the 352 will of the Malone a more Section 10 provision prevails 749 So 2d 6 detailed provision prevails Cook the latter a more entitled to an La 99 2827 La 9 30 99 automatic to LSA Const public pardon pursuant to La full a State v requires R S Adams no 1 572B sentence 36 816 Const art IV by the La 9 1102 E S5 E 921 922 La a plain art no 2 Cir 9 6 02 I not 1978 art I reference to the IV S5 action E to same 824 So 2d 1164 and 02 2448 4 B La to 592 a same effect provision See S5 a E pardon 1 LSA pardon by the gubernatorial pardon not to as An automatic have the by the governor 825 So 2d 585 qualify An automatic S10 and 1 60l of his sentence 10 S specific first offender he See LSA Const art IV Reference in LSA Const is a eligible does 1 2d So completion he is 1 more 3 Cir 9 27 99 App as governor under the governor of LSA Const App upon and 745 office under LSA Const art pardon that requires La S5 IV 355 So 2d 917 action 15 offender art pardon pardon granted by the governor of this state first 937 So 2d La 9 13 06 recent 99 1448 Skipper v 10 writ denied candidate for as and the previously enacted over 06 2190 matter subject same Second Mr Castillo maintains that because pursuant general To the extent Article I Section 20 may be construed to conflict with Article I was to LSA Under the people prevails Shyne v a office public general provision addressing the conflicting provisions 343 Castillo maintains that pursuant S20 he is entitled over a more supervision following in the the automatic first Malone v Tubbs writs denied 02 2322 1 10 02 826 So 2d 1110 see Cook 749 So 2d restore Mr Castillo art I October 3 legislative presented Code is a to declaration from this challenges nor see to the considered to voters due to nullity a pardon provision does not hold public office process that occurred challenge 18 1405C to S 1 0 approved by the 1998 The people right Mr Castillo seeks Lastly Const s The automatic at 10 11 prior court that LSA of the State of Louisiana alleged procedural defects to bringing validity of LSA by the trial 910 Moreover the election of 1998 would be in the the referendum to the Const art I court on untimely were not any Election LSA R S LSA R S 18 1401C CONCLUSION F or the affirmed foregoing Costs of this reasons appeal are the judgment assessed Mark Castillo AFFIRMED 5 to of the district comi is defendant appellant Vincent FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA THROUGH DOUG MOREAU DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS ft Y NO 2007 CE 1865 VINCENT MARK CASTILLO tf COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF LOUISIANA Kuhn J dissenting This is election suit an Vincent Mark Castillo Louisiana This as candidate for Governor amount order I OOO On was signed September s 19 was file date of on and September Castillo 2007 disqualified 11 55 at as That a m applicable attorney appeal September 18 2007 fees in the and the attached 17 no 2007 time is a signed at 12 01 p m The specified posted 2007 status 17 motion for direct a signed bond court costs Mr Mr was Castillo filed in district granted on September days after the judgment declaring Mr 20 court 2007 Castillo a request for at 3 10 p ineligible to m run signed Castillo voted no Pauper than three The The was September pauper status was judgment declaring Mr Castillo appeal record reflects that more s granting that motion bear The order of eligibility of defendant appellant candidate for the office of Governor of the State of a Castillo with all cast Mr of the appeal is untimely The district court judgment challenging s plaintiff appellee the appeal for failure appellate on court shall sit throughout the state en State of Louisiana filed to motion to dismiss Mr comply with the requirements of LSA bane in all election contests LSA RS a 18 1409H involving RS candidates for offices 18 1409D appellant order of In order to appeal and give bond obvious need for within the time appeal has not been bond statutes prevail When status court over lacks an actions or orders of to hear the Mr Castillo failed to subject to an on 425 on RS La 749 required 18 1409D his delay lapsed the trial by LSA effect with the the period 446 So 2d 747 comply the statutorily imposed may be declared unconstitutional or La Board All of Com Dist v App 1 Cir 10 6 06 timely secure pauper rs of Hammond Area Taxpayers Property Owners 944 So 2d 640 comply with the mandatory provisions of LSA trial court court lacks a final appeal 2 definitive RS jurisdiction Accordingly declaring appellant disqualified office has become 643 940 So 2d 675 appeal is untimely and this judgment of the s Jetson bond for costs appeal Development writ denied 06 2426 La 11 3 06 the governor is based courts timely give Citizens of Hammond 06 1832 the statute a 18 1409D after the statutory time v an appellant fails to timely take and perfect his appeal the appellate jurisdiction The no iudgment obtain contest After the 24 hour had election suit the 445 So 2d 424 Jetson established status Except where Economic and Indus 18 1409D v minutes two period him pauper Castillo failed to Mr an LSA R S court in the election Dumas properly perfected granting requirements by the Because Mr Castillo failed to act order judgment in stated in Dumas as procedural cOUli s appeal an twenty See facts 1 Cir 1983 App court fixed a sum treatment bond filed Appeal for delay for expedited expired is untimely La district a within twenty four hours after rendition of must The twenty four hour 1984 appeal as a candidate for judgment and is no longer
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
