Gundam Wing Fan Fiction ❯ Maxwell v. Louisiana ❯ Maxwell v. LA: background ( Chapter 1 )

Warnings and disclaimer: I don't own Gundam Wing or the characters. This fic does not have the Gundam boys as actual participants. This is a fictional US Supreme Court case. It could not occur at the present time (sadly or happily according to your point of view) due to current lack of Gundams and colonies. It is not written in the exact format of a Supreme Court opinion cause I don't think I could manage to make it show the right format on the web. There is no cursing or anything (jeeze…a SC Justice cursing in an opinion…weird…). Note, though, that the language is not as formal and technical as real court opinions, and I change some current laws and practices to suit my needs.

 

The case will be explained in the beginning. It involves Duo and war crimes. As far as I know, no one has attempted to write a court opinion about a Gundam Wing character, but tell me if you know of anyone who has.

 

Please don't leave yet - I'll try not to make it too technical, but I'm not sure I can manage. Tell me if it's way above your head and I'll work on it. The Justices are completely fictional (OC's), though their opinions and styles are based on actual Supreme Court Justices. (Tell me if you can guess who they are!) Many of the cases cited will be actual SC cases, though several in the AC time line will obviously be made up.

 

This first part is just the facts of the case (the background) and information on Maxwell v. LA I, which decided another issue.

 

Update: *Thank you to gundamligerzero for catching a stupid date error - I meant to put AC 200 something, but put AC 122 instead. Thank you very much for alerting me to that! *

 

 

The United States Supreme Court

 

Maxwell et al v. State of Louisiana

 

No. 121-343565

 

On writ of error from the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana

 

Argued December 9th, AC 204 - decided December 31st, AC 204

 

Held: The petitioner, Maxwell, though only 15 at the time he committed hundreds of murders, is a prime candidate for the death penalty due to the “severe and shocking” nature of his crimes. This is consistent with our rulings in Roper v. Simmons (2005), Card v. TX (AC 29), Banks v. Ogden (AC 65), and Lowe v. Odin (AC 179) as regards to the age at which somone can be eligible for the death penalty. We reaffirm our decision in Maxwell v. LA I (AC 201) as to the jurisdictional issues involved.

 

On January 3rd, AC 198, Duo Maxwell appeared before a trial court of Louisiana for the first time on 256 charges of 1st degree murder. He entered a plea of nolo contendere (no contest). During the trial, he alleged that he was illegally seized from his home colony, L2. Due to the illegal nature of the seizure, and because he is not a citizen of the U.S., he claims no court of the United States has jurisdiction to try his case. The trial court agreed with Maxwell and ruled that as the U.S. has no jurisdiction in the case, much less the state of Louisiana, the trial cannot be continued. The Attorney General appealed to the Court of Appeals of Louisiana and then the Supreme Court of Louisiana, both of whom affirmed the lower court's decision. The State then appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. We granted certiorari in Maxwell v. LA I, reversed the judgement, and remanded the case to the trial court for rehearing consistent with our opinion.

 

A summary of Maxwell v. LA I follows. Duo Maxwell was a Gundam pilot during the recent wars. While on Earth, he and the other pilots committed numerous crimes, ranging from murder and assault to larceny and grand theft of mobile suits. They were all colony citizens. After the wars and the unification of Earth and the colonies, the colonies declined to press charges against Maxwell and the other pilots for their war crimes.

 

Citizens of the Earth wished for the pilots to be tried. In particular, the United States wished to try Maxwell for the carnage he left in his wake. Because of this, a lottery was held as to which state would be allowed to try Maxwell. Louisiana won, and went about finding the young man. When L2 claimed Maxwell as a citizen of their system, the United States demanded he be captured and placed in their custody to be tried. L2 refused, so the US offered them “aid” in the form of trillions of dollars. L2 eventually found him, and threatened to kill the children in the orphange he ran if he did not peacefully surrender. Maxwell complied.

 

This court held that the state of Louisiana had jurisdiction to try Maxwell. We still hold this. The people of the United States did not commit the illegal and unethical seizure of the petitioner, so the exclusionary rule (illegal searches and seizures of a defendant are not admissible in court) does not apply. The exclusionary rule applies only to the government of the United States and the states, and evidence seized illegally and willingly given to the United States can be used in court. Because he was willingly surrendered to the U.S. by his own colony, the fact that he is not a citizen of the U.S. is of no consequence.

 

The trial court complied with the order for rehearing. Maxwell again pleaded no contest to the charges, but again alleged a constitutional barrier to the trial. This time, he alleged that the execution of minors is unconstitutional, as per Roper v. Simmons (2005). The trial court, Appeals, and Supreme Court of Louisiana all noted the allegation, but ruled that there was no barrier to the trial, due to the later rulings of Card v. TX (AC 29), Banks v. Ogden (AC 65), and Lowe v. Odin (AC 179). We granted certiorari in Maxwell's case in order to settle the issue once and for all.

 

Rogers, C.J. delivered the opinion of the court, in which Scalise, Tambers, Ochre, Harding, and McCullah, JJ. joined. Scalise, J. and Tambers, J. filed concurring opinions. Ochre, J. filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. Blanc, J. filed a dissenting opinion in which Noir, J. joined. Brandy, J. filed a dissenting opinion in which Noir, J. joined.

 

Author's Note: So how is it so far? Too technical? Please review and tell me what you thought. And yes, you're supposed to hate how the court just glosses over the horrible way in which Duo was treated. Threatening to kill the kids he takes care of?! I almost hate myself for writing it.

 

I will write the actual opinions next, but I'm thinking I'll eventually write a sequel in which the Supreme Court either apolgizes for being such jerks or overrules the case. Of course, by then Duo will probably be dead…

 

And to fellow Louisiana residents - I'm not trying to be mean to our state. I wanted to pick a state that I wouldn't be prejudiced against, so I picked LA. I happen to like it here and the civil code of law is rather interesting. I'm going to go to law school here next semester and I'm so excited!