State Of Louisiana v. Mark Anthony Spell
State Of Louisiana v. Mark Anthony Spell, No. 2021KW0284 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. May 24, 2021).
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Byrd 708 So. 2d 401
- State v. Thomas 111 So. 3d 386
Opinion text
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2021 KW 0284
VERSUS
MARK ANTHONY SPELL MAY 24, 2021
In Re: Mark Anthony Spell, applying for supervisory writs,
19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton
Rouge, Nos. DC - 20- 01764, DC - 20- 01765, DC - 20- 01766, DC -
20 - 01767, DC - 20- 01768, DC - 20- 01769.
BEFORE: THERIOT, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. We do not agree with relator that the free
exercise of religion is outside of the jurisdiction of the
government. See Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145, 25
L. Ed. 244 ( 1878).
It is clear that the Executive Orders gave religion more
protection than some secular businesses. However, it is equally
as clear that the executive orders gave some secular businesses
more protection than religion and that is where the scrutiny is
to be applied.
When the government restricts a person' s fundamental
freedom of religion, fundamental freedom of assembly and/ or
fundamental freedom to travel, it must do so in a non-
discriminatory way and proceed in the least restrictive manner.
This matter is before us on a motion to quash wherein
pretrial pleas are urged and do not go to the merits of the
charge. The evidence herein was limited to procedural and legal
argument of counsel. The question of factual guilt or innocence
is not before the court. See La. Code Crim. P. art.
531, et. seq.; State v. Byrd, 96- 2302 ( La. 3/ 13/ 98), 708 So. 2d
401, 411, cert. denied sub nom, Peltier v. Louisiana, 525 U. S.
876, 119 S. Ct. 179, 142 L. Ed. 2d 146 ( 1998). Moreover, while
evidence may be adduced, such evidence may not include a defense
on the merits. State v. Thomas, 2012- 0470 ( La. App. 1st Cir.
11/ 14/ 12), 111 So. 3d 386, 389. Therefore, we must deny the writ
at this juncture of the proceedings.
MRT
EW
CHH
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT