- •• r D
1 T' ¥l I........ I;..
l
~
E !
I
,au
,~
CLERK <OF cougar cnaava COURT »l»»
2 2521; SE? 16 pa# 3: BE
3 S?;3?§§RiGF' mum
4 &KEAM
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE NO.
NO. CF0427-24
CF0427-24
9 9 vs.
10 DECISION DECISION AND ORDER
11 ETHAN ETHAN JARRED AGUERO AGUERO
12 VICENTE TREVOR AGUERO AGUERO
KAWAII'LEI AII'LEI MENDIOLA, 13
14 Defendants.
Defendants.
15 15 INTRODUCTION
16 This matter This matter came before the came before theHonorable Honorable Vernon
Vernon P. Perez on August August 30, 2024, for hearing 17 17 on Defendant Defendant VICENTE TREVOR TREVOR AGUERO's
AGUERO's ("Vicente")
("Vicente") Motion
Motion to
to Sever Case for
Sever Case for Trial
Trial
18 18 ("Motion ("Motionto to Sever").
Sever"). Present
Presentwere
were Assistant
Assistant Attorney
Attorney General Leah Diaz-Aguon Diaz-Aguon on
on behalf
behalf of
of the
19 19 People People of ofGuam
Guam ("the Government"), Defendant DefendantVicente
Vicente with counsel, Heather M.
M. Quitugua, Co-
20 20 Defendant Ethan Jarred Defendant Ethan Jarred Aguero Aguero ("Ethan")
("Ethan") with counsel, Assistant Alternate counsel, Assistant Alternate Public Defender Defender
21 Tyler Tyler Scott, andCo-Defendant Scott, and Co-DefendantKawaii'Lei Kawaii'Lei Mendiola
Mendiola ("Mendiola")
("Mendiola") with
with counsel, Public counsel, Deputy Public
22 22 Defender Defender John John P.
P. Mon*ison.
Morrison. Having
Havingreviewed
reviewedthe
thepleadings,
pleadings,the
thearguments
argumentspresented,
presented, and
and the
23 record, Court now record, the Court now issues issuesthe
thefollowing
following Decision
Decision and
and Order.
24 BACKGROUND
25 25 On On July
July 2,
2, 2024,
2024, Vicente
Vicente was
was indicted
indicted with
with the
the following
following charges: (1) Burglary charges: (1) Burglary (As a 26 26 Second Degree DegreeFelony)
Felony) and
and(2)
(2)Criminal
CriminalMischief
Mischief (As Misdemeanor). 1 The Indictment also (As aa Misdemeanor).l
27
28 '1These Thesecharges chargesare
arereflected
reflectedininthe
theIndictment
Indictment as
as Charges Four and
Charges Four andFive.
Five.
People v.
v. Aguero,
Aguero, et al.
al,
Case No. CF0427-24 Case No. CF0427-24 Decision Decision and Order
Page Page l1 oofS 1 charges Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Ethan
Ethan with
with (1) Burglary (As a Second Degree Felony);
Felony), (2) Terrorizing (As
2 Degree Felony) with attached Special Allegation:
a Third Degree Allegation: Possession or Use of a Deadly Deadly Weapon
Weapon
3 Commission of in the Commission ofaa Felony, Felony; and
and (3)
(3) Assault
Assault on
on aa PeaCe Third Degree Peace Officer (As a Third Degree Felony)
4 with attached Special Allegation: Possession or Use of a Deadly Deadly Weapon
Weapon in the
the Commission
Commission of
of a
5 Felony,2 and Co-Defendant Felony;2 and Co-Defendant Mendiola Mendiola with
with (1)
(1) Burglary
Burglary via
via Complicity
Complicity (As
(As a Second Degree
6 Felony); (2)
Felony), (2) Eluding a Police Officer (As a Misdemeanor), Misdemeanor); and (3) Reckless Conduct (As a 7 Misdemeanor). 3 Id Misdemeanor).3 Id These Thesecharges
chargesstem
stemfrom
fromallegations
allegationsthat
thattwo
twomales,
males, later
later identified
identified as Ethan
8 and Vicente, forcibly entered entered Hyrule
Hyrule Market
Market in
in Mangilao
Mangilao in
in the
the early
early hours
hours of
of June
June 23, 2024,
2024; that
that
9 they escaped in a dark colored sedan driven driven by
by aa female
female operator,
operator, later
later identified as Mendiola;
Mendiola,
10 and that when police police tried
tried to effectuate aa traffic stop, the vehicle vehicle drove off
off at a high rate of speed 11 11 despite the patrol vehicles having their their lights and sirens initiated, and several gun shots were fired fired
12 12 from the vehicle while the police were pursuing it.
it. (Decl.
(Deel. of
of Sean
Sean Brown, Magistrate's Con Compl.,
13 13 Jun. 24, 2024).
14 14 On July 25, 2024, 2024, Vicente
Vicente filed
filed the
the instant
instant Motion.
Motion. The Government
Government did
did not
not file a written
15 15 opposition but orally opposition but the Motion opposed the
orally opposed Motion at at the
the Motion
Motion Hearing.
Hearing. On
On August
August 30,
30, 2024,
2024, Co-
Co-
16 16 Defendant Defendant Mendiola Mendiola orally joined the Motion orally joined Motion and and Co-Defendant
Co-Defendant Ethan
Ethan deferred
deferred to the Court.
17 17 DISCUSSION 18 18 Under Under Guam law:
19 19 If it appears that aa defendant appears that defendant or or the
the government
government is is prejudiced prejudiced by by aa joinder jointer of
of
offenses or of defendants in an indictment or information information oror by
by such
such joinder
jointer for
20 20 trial together, the court may order an election election or
or separate
separate trials of
of counts, grant a
21 severance ofof defendants defendants or
or provide
provide whatever
whateverother
otherrelief
reliefjustice
justicerequires
requires.
88 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 65.35 65.3544 (emphasis added). There is a general preference for joint trials of defendants (emphasis added). There is a general preference for joint trials of defendants 22
who are are indicted indicted together,
together, as
as joint
joint trials
trials serve
serve aa number
numberof
ofpurposes
purposes:
23 23
24
25 2 2 These Thesecharges charges are
are reflected
reflectedin
inthe
the Indictment
Indictment as
as Charges One,
One, Two,
Two, and Three.
and Three.
26 3 These charges are reflected in the Indictment as Charges 3 These charges are reflected in the Indictment as Six, Seven, and Eight.
and Eight.
27 4 Section 65.35mirrors Section 65.35 mirrorsRule Rule14(a)
14(a)of
ofthe
theFederal
FederalRules ofCriminal
Rulesof Procedure.See CriminalProcedure. See88G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 65.35,
65.35,Note.
Note. Rule
Rule
28 l4(a)
14(a) provides:
provides:
People v. Aguero, et al.
v. Aguero, al.
Case No.
No. CF0427-24
Decision Decision and and Order
Page 5 Page 2 ofS 1 It It would
would impair
impair both
both the efficiency
efficiencyand
and the
the fairness
fairness of
ofthe
the criminal
criminal justice system
system
to require,
require, in all these
these cases ofofjoint
jointcrimes
crimes where
where incriminating
incriminating statements
statements exist,
2 that prosecutors bring that prosecutors bring separate separate proceedings,
proceedings, presenting
presenting the
the same
same evidence
evidence again
3 and and again,
again, requiring
requiring victims and and witnesses witnesses to repeat
repeat the
the inconvenience
inconvenience (and
(and
sometimes trauma)
trauma) ofof testifying,
testifying, and
and randomly
randomly favoring
favoringthethelast-tried
last-trieddefendants
defendants
4 who have the advantage
advantage of of knowing the prosecution's case beforehand.
beforehand. Joint
Joint trials
5 generally generally serve
serve thethe interests
interests of justice
justice by
by avoiding
avoidinginconsistent
inconsistent verdicts
verdicts and
and
6 enabling enabling more accurate
accurate assessment
assessment of relative
relative culpability-advantages culpability-advantages which which
sometimes operate to sometimes operate to the the defendant's
defendant's benefit.
benefit. Even
Even apart
apart from
from these
these tactical
tactical
7 considerations, joint trials considerations, joint trials generally generally serve
serve the
the interests
interestsof
of justice
justice by
by avoiding the
the
8 scandal andinequity scandal and inequity of
of inconsistent verdicts.
9 Richardson v.
v. Marsh,
Marsh, 481 U.S.200, 210 (1987).
200,210 (1987). The
Thetrial
trialcourt
courthas
has great
great discretion
discretion when
when ruling
10 10 on a motion to sever. Zafiro v.
v. United
UnitedStates,
States, 506 U.S. 534,
534, 538-39 (1993) ("Rule 538-39 (1993) ("Rule 14
14 does
does not
11 11 require severanceeven require severance prejudice is if prejudice
even if is shown;
shown, rather
ratherititleaves
leavesthe
thetailoring
tailoringof
of the
the relief
relief to be
12 12 granted, if granted, if any, the district any, to the district court's court's sound
sounddiscretion.").
discretion."). Prejudice
Prejudice may
may be
be resolved
resolvedthrough
through the
13 13 use of aa limiting use of limitingjury juryinstruction
instructionorortaking
takingless
lessdrastic
drasticmeasures
measures other
otherthan
than requiring
requiring separate
separate
14 14 trials. See Richardson, 481 trials. 481 U.S. at at 211.l. The
TheCourt
Courtmust
must balance
balance the
the rights of
ofthe
the defendant
defendant to a
15 15 fair trial absent prejudice, which absent prejudice, which may may result
resultfrom
from the
thejoinder.
jointer. United
United States
States v.
v. Lewis, 787 F.2d
16 16 13 l8, 1321 1318, 1321 (9th Cir. 1986). The TheCourt
Courtmust
must grant severance
severance whenjoinder
when jointer would
would create "a serious
create "a
17 17 risk that that aajoint
joint trial
trial would compromise a specific trial trial right
right of
ofone
one of
ofthe
thedefendants,
defendants, or
or prevent
18 18 the the jury from making aa reliable reliable judgment about
about guilt or innocence."
innocence." Zafiro, 506 U.S. at at 539.
539.
'19 Severance of defendants Severance of defendants isis required required in
in cases
cases where
where the
the confession
confession of
of a non-testifying
non-testifying co-
20 20 defendant implicates the defendant implicates the other defendant, as the defendant, as the defendant's defendant's constitutional right to confront constitutional right confront 21 witnesses against him him would
would be
be infringed. Briton
Brutonv.v. United
UnitedStates,
States, 391 U.S. 123,
123, 133-36 (1968).
133-36 (1968).
22
23 (a) (a) RELIEF.
RELIEF. If If the
the jointer
joinderofofoffenses
offensesorordefendants
defendants ininan anindictment, indictment, an an information, information, or or aa
24 consolidation consolidation for fortrial appears to prejudice a defendant or the government, trial appears to prejudice a defendant or the government, the court the court may order separate trials of separate trials of counts, sever the counts, sever the defendants'
defendants' trials,
trials, or
or provide anyany other relief that other relief that justice justice
25 requires. requires.
26 As As such, such, the Court may
may turntum toto federal case case law
law interpreting
interpreting thethe analogous analogous federal
federal rules for guidance.
guidance. See,
See, e.g.,
e.g.,
Sumitomo itom oConstr.
Constr.Co.,
Co.,Ltd.
Ltd v.
v. Zhong Ye, Inc., 1997 Ye, Inc., 1997 Guam 8 ,r 7 ("Generally, when 8117 ("Generally, when a legislature adopts a statute which 27 is identical or or similar
similar to
to one
one inin effect anotherjurisdiction, effectininanother jurisdiction,ititisispresumed presumed that
that the
the adopting jurisdiction applies adopting jurisdiction applies the the
construction placedon consmction placed onthe thestatute
statute by
by the
the originating jurisdiction. This originating jurisdiction. This rule rule of
ofconstruction
construction is
is useful
useful in
in helping
helping the
the
28 judiciary interpret interpret statutes adopted from federal acts.").
statutes adopted from federal acts.").
v. Aguero,
People v. Aguero, et al.
al.
Case No. CF0427-24 Case No. Decision Decision and and Order
Page 3 of5
1 Here, Here, Vicente
Vicente argues
argues severance
severance is
is required
required because
because "Defendants
"Defendants Ethan
Ethan Aguero and
and
2 Kawaii'Lei 'Lei Mendiola
Mendiolamade
madevarious
various extrajudicial
extrajudicial statements implicating [him]
statements implicating [him] in the the crimes
crimes
alleged alleged and 5 did not want to participate in the crimes."
3 and also made statements thatEthan statements that EthanAguero Aguero5 did not want to participate in the crimes."
4 4 (Mot. Sever Sever at 1). Vicente sets sets forth that "it
"it appears the [G]overnment will seek appears the seek to to introduce
introduce
5 statements of Mr. Vicente statements of Vicente Aguero's Aguero'sco-defendants
co-defendantswhich
whichname
namehim
himas
as aa participant
participant in
in the crimes
6 and that alleged" and that"a "a limiting
limiting instruction
instructionwill
ill not
notsuffice
sufficetotocure
cure the
the prejudice
prejudice to [his] rights rights to
7 confront and and cross-examine witnesses against cross-examine witnesses against him him caused
caused by
by the
the admission
admission of incriminating incriminating
8 statements statements ororthe theconfession
confessionofofa anon-testifying non-testifying co-defendant co-defendant at trial."
at trial." Id.Idatat3.3. At At the Motion
the Motion
9 Hearing, Co-Defendant Co-Defendant Mendiola
Mendiolaalso
alsoargued
arguedthat
thateach
eachdefendant
defendant made
made inculpatory
inculpatory statements
statements
10 and acknowledged acts done by the co-defendants, thus thus requiring
requiring severance for each defendant.
defendant.
11 11 Although the the Court
Court does
does not
not have
have all
all the
the specific
specificstatements
statements each
each defendant
defendant made,
made, the
the
12 12 Declaration attached to the attached to the Magistrate's Complaint Complaint sets
sets forth
forth that
that all
all three
three defendants
defendants made
made
13 13 certain statements statementsto
topolice
police after they were arrested:
arrested:
14 14 Defendant Ethan was was interviewed interviewed about the burglary about the burglary and
and shooting
shooting and
andtold
told police
police
he was the
the one who shot and and threw threw the
the silver
silver revolver
revolver out
out the window during
during the
15 15 police chase.
police chase. Defendant
Defendant Ethan
Ethan admitted that
that he
he took
took the
the gun
gunfrom
from his
his cousin
cousin while
while
16 the cousin was sleeping along with extra bullets. Defendant Ethan indicated with extra bullets. Defendant Ethan indicated that the 16 bullets were .38
.38 caliber.
caliber. Defendant
DefendantEthan
Ethan also stated he and stated that he andDefendant DefendantVicente
Vicente
17 17 and Defendant and Defendant Mendiola
Mendiola talked
talked about
about hitting
hitting up up stores
storesforfor money
money prior to the the
burglary. Defendant Ethan burglary. Defendant Ethantold told police
police that they went to Hyrule that they Hyrule andand Defendant Defendant
18 18 Mendiola Mendiola parked
parked the vehicle
vehicle behind
behind a bus
bus stop
stop while
while Defendant Vicente
Vicente broke the
19 19 front door
door glass
glass and
and a padlock. Defendant
Defendant Ethan said that thathe heand
andDefendant
DefendantVicente
Vicente
the store
then entered the store and andstole
stole cash
cashand
andother
otheritems
itemsbefore
before all
all leaving in
in the same
the
20 20 vehicle. Defendant Defendant Ethan
Ethan said that
that during
during the
the police
police chase,
chase, hehe shot
shot at
atthe
thefront
front of
of
the police car
car to hit
hit the
the radiator and disable the and disable thevehicle.
vehicle.
21 Defendant Vicente was was interviewed interviewedand
and was
was mostly
mostlyconsistent
consistent with
with the
the statement
statement
22 made made by Defendant Ethan.
Ethan. Defendant Vicente added added that
that they took
took phone
phone cards
cards
23 from within within the
the store.
store. Defendant
Defendant Vicente
Vicentealso
alsoadded
added that
that he told
told Defendant
Defendant Ethan
Ethan
not to shoot the gun.
gun.
24 Defendant Mendiola
Mendiola was
was interviewed
interviewedand
and told
told police
policethat
that she
she was aware Defendant
25 Ethan and
andDefendant
DefendantVicente
Vicente were
were messaging
messaging each
each other
other about robbing to get get cash.
26 26
27 5 5 The Court Court is not sure if this is a typographical typographical error
error and Defendant
Defendant intended
intended to state
state that
that "Vicente Aguero did "Vicente Aguero did not not
the crimes"
want to participate in the crimes" in light light of
of what
what is
is set
set forth
forth in
inthe
theDeclaration
Declarationattached
attachedtotothe
theMagistrate's
Magistrate's Complaint
Complaint
28 ("Defendant ("Defendant Mendiola admitted that Defendant Vicente was indicating he he did did not
not want
want to
to do
do the
the robbery
robbery...").
...
People v. Aguero, et al.
v. Aguero, al.
Case No.
No. CF0427-24
Decision Decision and Order
Page 4 ofS
Defendant Defendant Mendiola admitted that Defendant admitted that DefendantVicente Vicente was indicating he did not indicating he
1 want to do the robbery because because hehe was
was scared
scared whereby
whereby Defendant
Defendant Mendiola
Mendiola told
2 him they need money and and itit would be a one-time thing. Defendant Mendiola Mendiola was
3 aware that Defendant aware that DefendantVicente Vicente had
had aa backpack
backpackwith
with aa crowbar
crowbar inin it when they planned to hit up planned to up the
the stores.
stores. Defendant
Defendant Mendiola
Mendiola stated
stated that
that she
she ducked
ducked down
4 during the cross fire and crashed crashedherhervehicle.
vehicle.
5 (Decl. (Deel. of ofSean
SeanBrown,
Brown, Magistrate's
Magistrate'sCon pl., Jun.
Compl., Jun. 24,
24, 2024).
2024). In
Inlight
lightofofthese
thesestatements,
statements, the Court
6 finds severance severance appropriate
appropriate pursuant
pursuant to Briton
Bruton as
as to all three defendants defendantsand
andtherefore
thereforeGRANTS
GRANTS
7 Vicente's Vicente's Motion Motion to
to Sever
Sever Case for
for Trial.
8 CONCLUSION
9 For the
the foregoing
foregoing reasons, the Court reasons, the Court hereby hereby GRANTS
GRANTS Defendant Vicente Aguero's Defendant Vicente
10 10 Motion Motion to to Sever
Sever Case
Case for
for Trial.
Trial. Defendant
DefendantVicente
VicenteAguero's
Aguero'scase
caseshall
shallbe
bedesignated
designated hereafter
hereafter
II as Criminal Case No. CF0427-24-01.
CF0427-24-01. Defendant Kawaii'Lei Mendiola's Defendant Kawaii'Lei Mendiola'scase case shall
shall be
be designed
designed
12 12 hereafter as Criminal Case No. CF0427-24-02.
CF0427-24-02. Defendant Ethan Aguero's Aguero's case
case shall
shall remain
remain as
as
13 1 originally identified, CF0427-24.
CF0427-24. All
All three
three matters
matters will
will be
be called
called on
on November
November4,
4, 2024
2024 at
at 9:30
14 14 a.m. At a.m. Atthat that time,
time, parties
parties should preparedto should be prepared discusswhich to discuss whichdefendant defendantwill
will proceed
proceed to
to trial
trial first.
first.
15 15 Tl/\
16 16 IT IS SO ORDERED ORDERED this \ ~1\Aday
day of
of September,
September, 2024.
2024.
17 17
18 .n
19 19 HONORABLE HONORABLE VERNON
VERNON p. P. PEREZ
Judge, Judge, Superior Court of Guam Guam
20 20
21
22
23
24 SERVICE VIA EMAIL SERVICE VIA EMAIL
II aclmowledge
acknowledge thatthat an
an electronic
electronic
copy copy ofof the
the original
0riginaI.was e-mdjed to:
was e-maiJed to:
25 * G,Aeo, pug,
26
27 \ l *¥%»---
Date9 4 '55 gr AW*9l\'U Pop
28 Dénwwémswam0°uf!0fGqim
People v. Aguero, et al.
v. Aguero,
Case No.
No. CF0427-24
Decision Decision and and Order
Page 5 of5
of