Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Allison Nguyen, Petitioner v. Louisiana

NO. ________

In the

Supreme Court of the United States

ALLISON NGUYEN,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF LOUISIANA,

Respondent.

__________________________

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, State of Louisiana

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Bruce Netterville

Counsel of Record

929 4th Street

Gretna, LA 70053

(504) 368-1540

abnetterville@yahoo.com

June 29, 2026

SUPREME COURT PRESS

Counsel for Petitioner

♦

(888) 958-5705

♦

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

i

QUESTION PRESENTED

Does a defendant have a right to a jury trial in a

misdemeanor domestic violence offense where the

penalty carries up to six months in jail, a $1,000.00

fine, loss of all Second Amendment rights under

federal law, loss of Second Amendment rights under

state law, and can never be expunged?

ii

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS

Petitioner

●

Allison Nguyen

Respondent

●

State of Louisiana

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

There is no corporate petitioner.

iii

LIST OF PROCEEDINGS

Supreme Court of Louisiana

No. 2025-K-01475

State of Louisiana v. Allison Nguyen

Order Denying Writ Application: May 12, 2026

_________________

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, State of Louisiana

No. 25-KP-312

State of Louisiana v. Allison Nguyen

Opinion: November 12, 2025

_________________

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, State of Louisiana

No. 25-K-255

State of Louisiana v. Allison Nguyen

Order Denying Supervisory Writ: June 13, 2025

_________________

Louisiana 24th Judicial District Court

(Jefferson Parish)

No. 24-5360

State of Louisiana v. Allison Nguyen

Sentencing: June 25, 2025

iv

_________________

Louisiana 24th Judicial District Court

(Jefferson Parish)

No: 22411195

State of Louisiana v. Allison Nguyen

Louisiana Uniform Abuse Prevention Order:

October 23, 2024

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

QUESTION PRESENTED .......................................... i

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS ......................... ii

LIST OF PROCEEDINGS ......................................... iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..................................... vii

OPINIONS BELOW ................................................... 1

JURISDICTION.......................................................... 1

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED...... 2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................... 3

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ................. 4

CONCLUSION............................................................ 6

APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPINIONS AND ORDERS

Order Denying Writ Application, Supreme Court

of the State of Louisiana (May 12, 2026) ........... 1a

Opinion, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, State of

Louisiana (November 12, 2025) ......................... 3a

Order Denying Application for Supervisory

Writs, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal, State of

Louisiana (June 13, 2025) ................................ 43a

Minute Order Denying Motion for Jury Trial,

24th Judicial District Court, Parish of

Jefferson – State of Louisiana (May 14, 2025) 47a

Louisiana Uniform Abuse Prevention Order

(October 23, 2024) ............................................ 49a

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)

Page

TRIAL AND HEARING PROCEEDINGS

Sentencing Minutes, 24th Judicial District

Court, Parish of Jefferson – State of

Louisiana (June 25, 2025) ................................ 64a

Trial Minutes, 24th Judicial District Court,

Parish of Jefferson – State of Louisiana

(June 18, 2025) ................................................. 67a

Arraignment Minutes Plea of Not Guilty

(January 17, 2025)............................................ 71a

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Proof of Transfer/ Declaration of Non-Possession

(October 23, 2024) ............................................ 73a

Motion for Jury Trial

(May 13, 2025) .................................................. 78a

Information for Domestic Abuse Battery ............... 80a

vii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page

CASES

Anderson v. Eight Judicial District,

135 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (2019) ............................... 5

Baldwin v. New York,

399 U.S. 66 (1970) ............................................... 3

Blanton v. City of Las Vegas,

489 U.S. 538 (1989) ............................................. 3

Duncan v. Louisiana,

391 U.S. 145 (1968) ............................................. 3

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

U.S. Const. amend. II ................................................. 4

U.S. Const. amend. VI ............................................ 1, 3

U.S. Const. amend. XIV .......................................... 1, 2

STATUTES

La. R.S. 14:35.3 ....................................................... 2, 4

1

OPINIONS BELOW

The Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

issued its opinion in No. 25-KP-312, on November 12,

2025. (App.3a). The Louisiana Supreme Court denied

a writ application, in No. 2025-K-01475, on May 12,

2026. (App.1a).

JURISDICTION

The judgment of the Louisiana Supreme Court

was entered on May 12, 2026. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1257(a). Federal subject

matter jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under its

application of the Sixth Amendment of the United

States Constitution which guarantees the right to a

public trial by an impartial jury as applied to the

State under the due process clause of the Fourteenth

Amendment of the United States Constitution. These

issues were timely raised in the trial court (App.46a),

as the principal issues on appeal in both the Louisiana

Appeals Court and Louisiana Supreme Court.

2

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED

U.S. Const. amend. VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall

enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an

impartial jury of the State and district wherein

the crime shall have been committed, which

district shall have been previously ascertained by

law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of

the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses

against him; to have compulsory process for

obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the

Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are

citizens of the United States and of the State

wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce

any law which shall abridge the privileges or

immunities of citizens of the United States; nor

shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty,

or property, without due process of law; nor deny

to any person within its jurisdiction the equal

protection of the laws.

3

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The boyfriend did not testify nor appear in court.

The abusive boyfriend told her “Wait ‘til we get home.”

The defendant took that as a threat. The defendant

has a photograph of a bruise on her face from prior

abuse. The boyfriend has six previous convictions for

various crimes.

The defendant would have most certainly been

acquitted before a jury. Domestic abuse battery (La.

R.S. 14:35.3) carries a sentence of six months Parish

Prison and a $1000.00 fine. Domestic abuse battery

negates Second Amendment rights under federal law

and negates gun rights in Louisiana for ten years from

the end of sentence. It can never be expunged. It is a

“serious offense.”

Prior to trial the defense moved for a jury trial.

The trial court denied the jury trial. The defense took

a writ to the Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal

who denied the writ, but stated, “Therefore, although

the offense with which Relator is charged is a serious

offense, it is not punishable by more than six months

imprisonment,” (App.45a). The Louisiana Fifth Circuit

refused to review its pre-trial writ decision in its posttrial writ. The Louisiana Supreme Court denied the

defendant’s writ on May 12, 2026. (App.1a).

4

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT

The court erred when it failed to grant a jury

trial. The right to a jury trial is to protect an accused

from the “over-jealous prosecutor” and the “compliant,

bias or eccentric judge” Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S.

145 (1968). The United States Supreme Court has

stated that although six months was a rule set by

Baldwin v. New York, an accused may show that the

statutory penalty is so severe that the case is “serious”

and jury trial is warranted. Blanton v. City of Las

Vegas, 489 U.S. 538 (1989). Baldwin v. New York, 399

U.S. 66 (1970). The constitution of the United States

never suggested a judge trial was required. United

States Constitution Sixth Amendment.

(1) Six months imprisonment; 30 days to 6 months

incarcerated.

(2) 48 hours is mandatory incarceration without

parole or suspension of sentence.

(3) The court honored the domestic abuse program

(4) No gun possession ten years post-sentence.

(5) 8-8 hour days of court approved community

service.

(6) Court monitored domestic abuse program;

La. R.S. 14:35.3.

In addition, a misdemeanor conviction for domestic

battery can never be expunged. It is on a person’s

record for life.

5

The prosecution considers domestic violence a

serious offense. The prosecution talks out of both sides

of their mouth. They believe misdemeanor domestic

abuse is so serious that they will take federal grant

money to prosecute it but at the same time argue it is

not so serious that citizens of Jefferson Parish should

be allowed to decide the cases.

The Supreme Court of Nevada has ordered jury

trials in domestic abuse cases. The state is a conservative western state that values Second Amendment

rights to own and possess firearms. (U.S. Const.

amend. II). The Nevada Supreme Court stated:

Because our statues now limit the right to

bear arms for a person who has been convicted of misdemeanor battery constituting

domestic violence, the Legislature has determined that the offense is a serious one. And,

given this new classification of the offense, a

jury trial is required.

Anderson v. Eight Judicial District, 135 Nev. Adv. Op.

42 (2019).

The prosecution, the Louisiana Appellate Court

and the United States government consider domestic

violence a “serious” offense. Dictionary.com defines

serious as “requiring deep thought and careful consideration, rather than being humorous or trivial.”

Serious should not have different meanings to suit the

whim of the prosecution.

6

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, this petition should

be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Bruce Netterville

Bruce Netterville

Counsel of Record

929 4th Street

Gretna, LA 70053

(504) 368-1540

abnetterville@yahoo.com

Counsel for Petitioner

June 29, 2026