FI l ED
11 CLERK@151 CLERK OF COURT
QGURT
2 AUG 29 PSI 202l1 MIG 232 PM3:3:Lula
44
I
3 SUPERIOR SI *FERNE COURT
4 OF(auAev= UF GLl/\f\f1
5 5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, Criminal Criminal Case
Case No.
No. CM0363-22
8 GPD Report GPD ReportNo.
No.21
21-26405
v.
9 DECISION DECISION AND AND ORDER
1o UGOCHUKWU UGOCHUKWU ENYINNAYA AKOMA, DENYING DENYING THE OAG'S
10 DOB: 02/28/1972 DOB: 02/28/1972 STATEMENT STATEMENT OF OF OBJECTION 11 11 7 G.C.A. §§ 6107 7 G.C.A. 6107&&MOTION
MOTION TO
TO
Defendant. Defendant. DISQUALIFY 12 12
13 13 INTRODUCTION 14 14 This matter is before matter is before the
theHonorable
HonorableAlberto
Alberto C.
C. Lamorena,
Lamorena, III
III upon
uponthe
theOffice
Office of the Attorney
15 General's 15 (the "OAG's")
General's (the "OAG's") Statement Statement of
of Objection
Objection 7
7 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6107
6107 &
& Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify (the
(the
16 16 "Objection").
"Objection"). The TheOAG
OAGobjects
objectstotothe
theHonorable
HonorableAlberto
Alberto E.
E. Tolentino's
Tolentino's ("Judge
("Judge Tolentino's")
Tolentino's")
17 17 competency competencytotopreside presideover
overthe
theabove-captioned
above-captionedmatter
matter under
under 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6107.
6107.
18 18 Having considered the Objection, considered the Objection, Judge JudgeTolentino's
Tolentino's Answer, the OAG's OAG's Response,
Response, as
as well as
as
19 the 19 theapplicable applicablestatutes statutesand
and case
case law
law and relevant portions and all relevant portions of ofthe
the record,
record, this
this Court
Court now
now issues
issues the
20 following followingDecision Decisionand
and Order
Order DENYING the OAG's
OAG'srequest
request to
to disqualify
disqualify Judge
Judge Tolentino
Tolentino and
and
21 reassign this case.
case.
22 BACKGROUND
23 Defendant is charged Defendant is with two counts charged with counts of of Fourth
Fourth Degree
Degree Criminal
Criminal Sexual
Sexual Conduct
Conduct (as aa
24 Misdemeanor).
Misdemeanor). See Complaint (Oct. 20, 2022).
25 Judge Tolentino was subsequently Judge Tolentino assigned to subsequently assigned to preside preside over this criminal case. See Notice of
26 Judge JudgeAssignment Assignment (Dec.
(Dec. 13,
13, 2022).
2022).
27 27 On July On 19, 2024,
July 19, 2024,the
theOAG
OAGfiled
filed their
their Statement ofObjection Statementof 6107 & G.C.A. §§ 6107
Objection77G.C.A. & Motion Motion to
to
28 Disqualify.
Disqualify.The TheOAG
OAGseeks
seeksJudge
JudgeTolentino's
Tolentino'sdisqualification disqualificationon
on the
the following
following grounds:
grounds:
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People of
ofGuam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Akoma Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Aroma Page 1 of12 11 • • Judge Tolentino's
Judge established history Tolentino's established history of of disqualifying himself
himself from
from matters
matters in
in which
which
2 Moylan appeared Doug Moylan appeared as
as private
private counsel,
counsel, prevents
prevents Judge
Judge Toler
Tolento from
from handling
handling
3 involving the matters involving matters the OAG nowthat OAG now that Doug
DougMoylan
Moylancurrently
currently serves
serves as
as the
the elected
elected
4 General of Guam.
Attorney General
5 • • Judge
Judge Tolentino's personal relationship with Tolentino's personal with Attorney General Moylan Attorney General Moylannecessitates necessitates his
6 disqualification in matters disqualification mattersinvolving involving the
the OAG. Judge Tolentino
OAG. Judge Tolentino is
is mam'ed
married to Attorney
7 General Moylan's General ex-wife. and Moylan's ex-wife. and Attorney Attorney General
General Moylan is
is the
the father
father of
of Judge
Judge
8 Tolentino's step-children.
Tolentino's step-children.
Objection at 2 (Jul.
9 See Objection (Jul. 19, 2024).
10 10 On July On July 29,
29,2024,
2024,Judge
JudgeTolentino
Tolentinofiled
filedhis AnswertotoObjection hisAnswer Objection("Answer"). his response, Inhis
("Answer"). In response,
11 Judge 11 udge Tolentino Tolentino challenged challenged the
the timeliness
timelinessof the OAG's
of the Objection. See Answer OAG's Objection. Answer at at 1111 (Jul. 29,
ll (Jul. 29, ,r
12 2024). 12 024).Judge JudgeTolentino
Tolentinoalso
alsomade
madethe followingresponses, thefollowing responses,under underpenalty
penalty of
ofperjury,
perjury, which
which the
the Court
Court
13 finds 13 findsparticularly particularlyrelevant
relevantin
inits
its recusal
recusal determination:
14 14 • 'Ly • ,r 6.6.That
ThatatatMr.
Mr.Moylan's
Moylan's request,
request, aa meeting between him and the undersigned, the undersigned's chamber staff, undersigned's chamber staff, the the Administrator
Administrator of
of the
the Courts,
Courts, and
and Mr.
Mr. Moylan's
15 15 transition chairperson, Mr. Wilfred Aflague, occurred in December December 2022.
16 16 • fl,r 7.7. That • That at this meeting, Mr. Moylan Moylan assured
assured me
me and the other members in attendance 17 17 that he perceived no conflict in his election as the Attorney General and the prosecution of criminal
criminal cases
cases before
before the
the undersigned.
undersigned. It waswas agreed agreed that
that the
the circumstances
circumstances
18 18 underlying my recusal in matters recusal in matters that Mr. Moylan Moylan was a
a lawyer no longer existed, lawyer no longer existed, to 19 19 wit: that during my term as the the Magistrate
Magistrate Judge
Judge and
and as
as aaJudge
JudgeI Ihad
hadroutinely
routinelyrecused
reused
myself myself from all matters where Mr. Moylan was the the attorney attorney of
of a party before me on
20 the basis that he was the the father
father of
of my
my minor
minor step-children
step-children and that
that the minor
minor stepstep
-
children children were members of household maintained by me and my wife of and resided in the household 21 and that as of of even date, both step-children have now reached majority and adulthood 22 and have been residing at their own residences in Guam and in the U.S. Mainland.
23 • 1]8.
• ,r That
That Mr.
Mr. Moylan
Moylan never
never made
made an
an appearance
appearance as
as a lawyer
lawyer in this case.
24 • 1114. • ,r 14. That my wife Doris L.G. Tolentino Tolentino and Attorney General Moylan were divorced 25 on June 13, 1997, and that there were two minor children at the time of the dissolution ofmaniage, of marriage,totowit:
wit: Brandon
Brandon(bam
(born1990)
1990) and
and Angela
Angela (born
(born 1992).
1992).
26 • 11 • ,r 17.
17. II have never observed observed Mr.
Mr. Moylan
Moylan and
and my
my wife involved in any sense in coco -
27 parenting the children of their marriage manage as asthe
thechildren
childrenhave
have been
been raised
raised and
and provided
28 with protection and care to ensure their healthy healthy development into adulthood, primarily
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
theOAG's
OAG's Statement
StatementofofObjection
Objection77G.C.A.
G.C.A.§§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22,People
People of
ofGuam
Guam v. Ugochukwu
Ugochukwu Enyinnaya
Enyinnaya Akoma
Page 2 of 12
1 by my wife wife and
and me,
me, and
and that
that at present they are in fact adults able to conduct and make decisions in
their own decisions in life.
2 2
3 3 • 1118. • ,r 18. That based
based upon
upon the
the foregoing averments, the fact that that Attorney
Attorney General
General Moylan
the biologica
is the biological fa
father of
of the
the under
undersigned's stepchildren signed's stepchildr en provides ovides no ba
basis for
for
4 4 disqualification under 77 G.C.A.
disqualification under G.C.A. §§6105(b) or or that
that the
theundersigned's
undersigned's "impartiality "impartiality might
might
questioned" as
reasonably be questioned" as required requiredunder
undersubsection
subsection(a)
(a).
55
66 • 11 • ,r 19.
19. That "[u]nder subsection 6105(a), 6105(a), what matters
matters is not "actual bias", but "the appearance of of bias." Van Van Dox
Dox at ,r (citing Dizon v. Super.
at 1]32 Super. Ct.
Ct. (People), 1998 Guam (People), 1998
7 7 ,r 1010n.3).
3 11 n.3). The appearance appearance of of bias
bias is judged from the
the standard
standard of of aa "reasonable "reasonable
knows all
person" who knows all the the facts,
facts, and
and understands
understands the
the "contents
"contents of
of the
the jurisdictions,
jurisdictions,
8 8 parties, and controversies parties, and controversies involved,"
involved," including such "realities "realities of the Guam judicial system" as system" as the relatively small number number of of lawyers in the Guam barbar and "the nature of of 9 Guam families." Id. Id. (citation (citation omitted).
10 • 'll • ,r 30.
30. My wife and
and Mr.
Mr. Moylan have been
been divorced
divorced for
for close
close to twenty-seven years 11 and that the children of their marriage mam'age are adults livingliving on their own own and well over the age of
of Maj rarityand
majority andthat
thatnonoreasonable
reasonableperson
personwho whoknows
knows all all the
the facts
facts and
and understands
understands
12 the contents of
of the jurisdiction,
jurisdiction, parties and and controversies controversies involved
involved in the Guam judicialjudicial 113 t em would s ystem ld conclu
concludede t ha t t her e ex is t s a n a p t there exists an appearancep ea r a nce of bbias requiring my ia s r equ ir ing
disqualification in this matter.
14 14 d.
15 15 16 On August 14, 2024, 2024, the
the OAG
OAG filed
filed their
their Amended Response to to Judge Judge Tolentino's
Tolentino's Answer
16 17 ("Response").
("Response").The TheOAG OAGasserts
assertstheir
their Objection
Objection was timely tiled.
filed. See Response at 1-31-3 (Aug. 14, 17 2024).The lg 2024). OAG The OAG expandsonontheir alsoexpands also theirargument argumenthatthatJudge
JudgeTolentino
Tolentinoisisbiased
biasedper
per se,
se, arguing
arguing that
18 19 Judge JudgeTolentino's Tolentino'spersonal
personalrelationship
relationshipwithwithAttorney Attorney General
General Moylan
Moylan has
has not substantially
19 20 . changed and continues to provide aa basis basis for for his
his disqualification. Id. at 3-6.
20 21 On July 30, 2014, this Court was assigned to address the Objection. See Notice of 21 22 Assignment AssignmentofofRecusal Recusal Judge
Judge(Jul.
(Jul. 30,
30, 2024).
2024).
22 DISCUSSION
23 I. 1. The Law Governing Governing Judicial
Judicial Disqualification Disqualification:
24 25 Judicial Judicial disqualifications disqualifications are
are governed
governed by by the
the substantive rules of substantive rules of 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6105
6105 and
and the
the
25 26 procedural rocedural rules rules of
of7 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§§§6106
6106 and6107.
and 6107. Section
Section6105
6105 defines
defines the
the grounds for disqualifications grounds for disqualifications 26 as follows:
follows:
27 (a) Any
Any Judge
Judge shall
shall disqualify
disqualify himself
himselforor herself
herselfinin any proceeding proceeding in
in which
which his or her
28 impartiality might might reasonably be questioned, but if, following complete disclosure to
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement
Statement of
of Objection
Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People
People of
ofGuam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya
Enyinnaya Akoma
Aroma
Page 3 of12
of
11 all parties parties in the proceeding proceeding of
of the
the reasons
reasons for
for disqualification,
disqualification, all parties parties agree to
having the Judge continue to Judge continue to sit in the the proceedings,
proceedings, he or she
she need not disqualify
disqualify
2 himself himself or herself.
3 (b) (b) AAJudge
Judgeshall
shallalso
also disqualify
disqualifyhimself
himselfororherself
herselfin inthe
the following
followingcircumstances,
circumstances, but
but
4 if, if, following
followingcomplete
completedisclosure
disclosuretotoall
allparties
parties in
inthe
the proceeding
proceeding of ofthe
the reasons
reasons for his
or her
her disqualification, all parties disqualification, all agree to having the Judge parties agree continue to Judge continue to sit in the the
5 proceedings, he or sheshe need neednotnotdisqualify
disqualify himself
himself or herself:
herself:
6 (1) Where
Whereheheororshe
shehas
hasa apersonal
personalbias
bias or
orprejudice
prejudice concerning
concerning aa party,
party, or
7 personal personal knowledge of of disputed disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
proceeding,
8 (2) Where Whereininprivate
privatepractice
practiceheheor
orshe
sheserved
served as
as aa lawyer
lawyer in
in the
the matter
matter in
in
controversy, or
or a lawyer
lawyer with
with whom
whom hehe or
or she
she previously practiced law served 9 during during such association as such association as aa lawyer or or either
either has
has been
been aa material
material witness
witness
10 10 concerning the matter, matter;
11 11 (3) Where Whereheheororshe
shehas
hasserved
servediningovernmental
governmentalemployment
employment andand in
in such
such
capacity participated
participated asas counsel, counsel, advisor or material material witness concerning concerning the
12 12 proceeding proceeding or, as
as such government employee, such government employee, expressed an official expressed an official opinion opinion
concerning the merits of the the particular matter in
in controversy;
controversy,
13 13
14 14 (4)
(4) Where
Wherehe heororshe
sheknows
knowsthat
that he
he or
or she,
she, individually
individually oror as
as aa fiduciary, or
or his
or her spouse or minor child child residing residing in
in his
his or
or her
her household,
household, has has a financial 15 15 interest in the subject matter in controversy or or is is aa party
party to
to the
the subject
subject matter
matter
in in controversy
controversy or
or is
is aa party to
to the
the proceeding,
proceeding, oror in
in any
any other
other interest
interest that could
16 16 be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
substantially affected proceeding, 17 17 (5) (5) Where
Whereheheororshe
she or
orhis
his or
orher
her spouse,
spouse, or
or a person within
within the third
third degree
degree of
of
18 18 relationship to either either of
ofthem,
them, or
or the
the spouse
spouse of
ofsuch
such person:
person:
19 19 (A) (A)isisa aparty
partytotothe
theproceeding,
proceeding,or oran
an officer,
officer,director,
director, or
or trustee of a
trustee of
20 party;
party;
(B) (B)isis acting
acting as
as a lawyer
lawyer in
in the proceeding;
proceeding,
21 (C)
(C) is known by the Judge to havean is known by the Judge to have an interest interest that
that could
could be substantially
affected affected by the the outcome ofof the proceeding;
proceeding,
22 22 (D)
(D) is to the Judge's knowledge likelyto is to the Judge's knowledge likely tobe beaa material
material witness
witness in in the
23 proceeding.
24 See 7 G.c.A. §§ 6105.
7 G.C.A. 6105.
25 Section Section 6106 compels a
6106 compels judge to
a judge to disclose
disclose aa disqualification disqualificationlisted
listedunder § 6105
under§ 6105::
26 Whenever Whenever aa Justice
Justice or Judge
Judge shall
shall have
haveknowledge
knowledge of of any
any fact or facts which, under under
provisions of
the provisions of6105
6105 of
ofthis
this Chapter,
Chapter, disqualify
disqualifyhim
himororher
herto
tosit
sitor
oract
actas
as such
such in
in any
27 action or proceeding pending before him him or or her,
her, it
it shall
shall be his or
or her duty to declare
the same in open
open court
court and
and cause .a memorandumthereof a memorandum thereofto to be
be entered in the minutes.
28 It shall
shall be the
the duty of
of the clerk to transmit forthwith a copy of the clerk to transmit forthwith a copy ofsuch suchmemorandum
memorandum to
Decision Decision and OAG's Statement and Order Denying the OAG's of Objection Statement of Objection 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People
People of
ofGuam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya AkomaAroma Page 4 o f 12 1 each party or his his or
or her
her attorney
attorney who
who shall have
have appeared in such action or proceeding, proceeding,
except such parties asas are presented in person or by attorney when the declaration is are presented
2 made. 3 See 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6106.
6106.
4 If aa judge If judge fails
fails to
to disclose
disclose aa disqualifying disqualifying factor under §6105, factor under§ 6105, then
then any
any party to the
party to the action
action who
who
5 as appeared 6 has appeared in in the the case
case maymay raise
raise the objection to
the objection to competency.
competency. In
Inthis
this regard,
regard, §§ 6107
6107 provides
provides as
as
6 follows:
77 follows:
8 Whenever a Justice or Judge who shall shall be be disqualified
disqualified under the
the provisions
provisions of
of this
Chapter to
to sit or act
act as
as such
such in action or proceeding pending before him or her in any action
9 neglects or fails to declare his or her disqualification disqualification in the manner provided by this 10 10 Chapter, any party to to such action or such action or proceeding proceeding who has appeared therein may present file with the clerk a written statement objecting to the hearing of to the court and file of such 11 matter or any trial of any issue of fact or law law in in such action
action or proceeding
proceeding before such
Justice Judge, and setting forth Justice or Judge, forth the fact fact or
or facts
facts constituting the ground constituting the ground of the 12 disqualification disqualification ofof such such Justice
Justice or Judge.
Judge. Copies of of such such written
written statement
statement shall
shall
forthwith be served by the presenting presenting party
party on
on each
each party,
party, or
or his or her attorney, who 13 13 has appeared in the action or proceeding proceeding and on the Justice or Judge alleged in such 14 14 statement statement to be disqualified.
15 15 Within ten (10) days after the service of of such statement as above provided, or ten (10)
days after the filing
tiling of any statement, whichever whichever is later in time, the Justice or Judge 16 16 alleged therein to be disqualified may file with the clerk his or her consent in writing 17 17 that the action oror proceeding proceeding continue without him or her, or may tile file with the clerk his or her written answer admitting or denying denying anyany oror all all of
of the allegations contained 18 18 in such statement statement andand setting
setting forth
forth any
any additional
additional fact
fact or
or facts
facts material or relevant to the question
question ofof his or her disqualification. The clerk shall forthwith transmit a copy of 19 19 consent or
the Justice's or Judge's consent or answer answer to each party or his or her attorney who shall 20 have appeared in such action or proceeding. Every such statement and every answer shall shall be verified
verified in the
the manner
manner prescribed
prescribed for for the
the verification
verification of of pleadings.
pleadings. The
21 statement statement of a party objecting to party objecting to the the Justice
Justice or
or Judge
Judge on on the ground
ground of his or her her
disqualification disqualification shall
shall be
be presented
presented atat the
the earliest
earliest practicable
practicable opportunity
opportunity after
after his or her
22 appearance and discovery discovery ofof the facts constituting constituting the ground
ground of of the Justice's or Judge's 23 disqualification, and in any event event before
before the commencement
commencement of ofthe the hearing
hearing ofof any issue
of of fact in the action or proceeding before such Justice or Judge.
proceeding before such Justice or Judge. · '
24 No Justice or Judge who shallshall deny deny his
his or
or her
her qualification
qualification shall
shall hear
hear or pass upon the
25 question question of his or herher own own disqualification,
disqualification, butbut in in every case the question of the Justice's or Judge's
Judge's disqualification shall be heard heard andand determined
determined by some other Judge.
26 The Presiding
Presiding Judge,
Judge, or
or next
next senior
senior Judge,
Judge, ifif it is the Presiding Presiding Judge's disqualification 27 being requested, that is being requested, shall shall make
make such assignment
assignment within
within five (5) days after receiving receiving
from the clerk the notice thatthat the statement statement of of disqualification disqualification has been filed. In the 28 case of of aa Justice's
Justice's disqualification, the matter disqualification, the matter shall shall be
be heard
heard by the Supreme
Supreme Court
Court
constituted without the questioned Justice.
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&& Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People
People of
ofGuam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Akoma Aroma
Page Page 5 of12
of 12
If such Judge admits his Ifsuch his or her her disqualification, or files disqualification, or files his his or
orher
her written
written consent
consent that
that
2 the action or proceeding be tried before another Judge, before another Judge, or or fails fails to file the answer within file the
the ten (10) orififititshall allowed, or
(10) days allowed, shallbe bedetermined
determinedafterafterthe
thehearing
hearingthat
that he
he or
or she
she is
3 disqualified, the disqualified, the action action or
or proceeding
proceedingshall shall be
beheard
heard and
and determined
determined by by another another Judge
4 of the Superior ofthe Court who Superior Court who is is not
not disqualified.
disqualified.Such
Suchother
otherJudge
Judge shall
shall be
be assigned
assigned in in the
same manner as as the
theJudge
Judgewho
whowas was disqualified
disqualified was assigned to hear the the case case initially.
initially.
5 6 See 7 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6107.
6107.
6 7 7 II. The Objection is is procedurally
procedurally defective,
defective, because
because it was not
not timely
timely filed at
at the
the earliest
earliest
8 8 practicable opportunitynor practicable opportunity norprior prior to
to any hearing
hearing of
of factual
factual issues
issues before
before Judge
Judge
9 9 Tolentino. Having Tolentino. Having failed
failed to
to timely
timely file their
their Objection, the
the OAG
OAG has
has waived
waived its
its right
right to
10 10 object.
11 11 The Court will will first
first address
address the procedural
procedural issue
issue of
of whether
whether the
theOAG's
OAG's Obj action was timely Objection
12 filed. 12 filed.Judge JudgeTolentino
Tolentinoinitially
initiallyraised
raisedthe
theissue oftimeliness,
issueof timeliness,stating stating "that
"that neither
neither Mr. Moylan
Moylan nor
nor the
13 Office 13 Officeofofthe theAttorney
AttorneyGeneral
Generalhad
hadever
everchallenged orobjected challengedor objectedto
tome
mepresiding
presiding over
overthis
this case
case until
until
14 14 the instant instantStatement StatementofofObjection
ObjectionandandMotion
Motiontotodisqualify."
disqualify." See Answer
Answer at
at,119 (Jul. 29,
9 (Jul. 29, 2024).
15 15 Where a , Where judge neglects
a judge neglects or
or fails
fails to
to disclose
disclosehis
hisdisqualification
disqualificationmandated
mandated under
under§ 6105,
6105, §§ 6107
6107
16 16 17 provides rovidesthat that "any
"anyparty
partytotosuch
suchaction
actionor
orproceeding
proceedingwho
whohas
hasappeared
appeared therein
therein may
may present
present to the
the
17 18 court 18 courtand and file
filewith
withthe
theclerk
clerkaawritten
writtenstatement objecting to statement objecting to the the hearing
hearing of
ofsuch matter or
such matter or any
anytrial
trial of
of
19 19 any any issue issue of offact
factororlaw
lawininsuch
suchaction
actionororproceeding
proceedingbefore
beforesuch
suchJustice
Justice or
orJudge,
Judge, and
and setting forth
20 hefact 20 the factor orfacts
factsconstituting
constitutingthe
the ground ofthe
ground of the disqualification disqualificationofofsuch
suchJustice
Justice or
or Judge.
Judge. Copies of
ofsuch
such
21 rittenstatement Z; written statementshall shallforthwith
forthwithbe
beserved
servedby thepresenting
bythe presentingparty
partyon
oneach
each party,
party, or
or his
his or
or her attorney,
22 hohas 23 who hasappeared appeared in
in the
the action
action or
orproceeding andon
proceedingand onthe
theJustice
Justice or
or Judge
Judge alleged
allegedin
insuch
such statement
statement to
23 24 disqualified." See 7 24 bee disqualified." G.C.A. §§ 6107.
7 G.C.A. 6107.
25 Importantly, §§ 6107 Importantly, 6107 mandates that "the mandates that "the statement statement of
of a
a party objecting to
party objecting Justice or the Justice
to the or Judge
Judge
26 on the ground of his or her disqualification shall be presented at the earliest practicable opportunity on the ground of his or her disqualification shall be presented at the earliest practicable opportunity 27 after ifter his or or her
her appearance
appearance and
and discovery
discovery of
ofthe
the facts
facts constituting
constituting the
the ground of
ofthe
the Justiee's
Justice's or
28 ]ua'ge's udge's disqualgication, disqualification, and
and in
in any event before
before the commencement
commencementof
ofthe
re hearing
nearing of
of any issue of
of fact
fact
Decision Decision and
and Order Denying the
Order Denying theOAG's
OAG's Statement ofObjection Statement of Objection77G.C.A.
G.C.A.§§6107
6107&&Motion
Motionto
toDisqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22,People
People of
ofGuam
Guam v.
v, Ugochukwu
Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Akoma Aroma
Page Page 6 of12 1l in inthe the action action or
or proceeding before
before such
such Justice
Justice or
or Judge."
Judge." Id. (emphasis
emphasis added). The Guam added). The Guam Supreme
Supreme
2 Court 2 Court has has confirmed
confirmed that
that statements
statements of objection
objection shall
shall "be
"bepresented
presented at
at the
the earliest
earliest practicable
practicable
3 opportunity after.'
after .. discovery
discovery of
ofthe
the facts
facts constituting
constituting the
the ground
groundfor
for disqualification." Van Dox dlsqualllicatlon." See Van Dox 4 v.. Super Ct., 2008 2008 Guam
Guam 771144.
,r 44.
5 "Aparty's "A party'sfailure
failuretotocomply
complywith
withany
anyofof
these
theserequirements
requirementsconstitutes
constitutes sufficient
sufficient grounds
grounds to
6 strike or 7 strike or disregard disregard the
the statement
statement of
of objection."
objection." See People
People v.
v. Johnny,
Johnny, 2006 Guam 10 1] 11.
11. Thus,
Thus, ,r
8 "with "withrespect respecttotothe
thestatutory
statutory provision
provisionrequiring
requiringthat
that disqualification
disqualificationbe
beurged
urgedat
at the
the 'earliest
earliest practical
9 opportunity] 9 opportunity,' the the intention
intention is
is 'clear
'clear thatfailure
that failure toto comply
comply with
with the
the provision
provision constitutes
constitutes a waiver. a n waiver."'
10 See Van Dox Dox v.v. Super Ct., 2008 Guam Guam 77,r1[ 44
44 (quoting Caminetti v.v.Pac.
(quoting Caminetti Pac.Mut.
Mut.Ins.
Ins.Co.
Co.of
offal.,
Cal., 139
139
11 .2d 930, 12 P.2d 930, 933 933 (Cal.
(Cal. 1943)
1943) (emphasis
(emphasis added)).
added)). The
TheGuam
GuamSupreme
Supreme Court
Courtapplied
appliedthis
this"si1ence-as-
"silence-as-
12 waiver rule"
rule" in San
San Union,
Union, Inc.
Inc. v.
v. Arnold,
Arnold, "to avoid the possibility of 'lying the possibility 'lying in in wake,
wake, raising
raising the
the
13
14 14 recusal ecusal issue issue only after
after learning
learning the
the court's ruling
ruling on
on the
the merits."' See San
merits."' San Union, Inc. v.
Union, Inc. v. Arnold,
15 2017 15 017 Guam Guam 10 ,r 10 fl 27 (quoting Phillipe Phillips v.
v. Amoco
Amoco Oil Co., 799
799 F.2d 1464, (nthh Cir. 1986).
1472 (11t
1464, 1472
16 16 However, aa finding
finding of
oftimeliness
timeliness "should
"should be
be 'construed
'construed liberally' to
to promote
promote justice." See
17 17 Van Dox Van Dox v.v. Super Super Cr.,
Ct., 2008
2008 Guam 7 1145 ,r
45 (quoting Eagle Mains.
Maint. & Supply
Supply Co.
Co. v.
v. Super.
Super. Cr.,
Ct., 16
16
18 18 Cal.Rptr. 745, 19 Ca1.Rptr. 745, 747 (Dist.Ct.App.
(Dist.Ct.App. 1961)).
1961)).AAtimely
timelystatement
statementofofobjection
objectionisismade
made "prior
"priortoto any
any hearing
19 20 eforethe 20 before thechallenged challenged judge
judge in
in the Matter." Id. at 1146.
the matter." ,r 46.
21 In his Answer, Judge Tolentino raised In raised the issue issue of
of timeliness,
timeliness, stating
stating "that
"that neither
neitherMr.
Mr. Moylan
Moylan
22 nor 22 orthe the Office Officeofofthe
theAttorney
AttorneyGeneral
Generalhad everchallenged hadever challengedor
orobjected
objected to
to me
me presiding
presiding over
over this
this case
case
23 23 until the instant ntil the instantStatement Statementof
ofObjection
Objectionand
andMotion todisqualify."
Motionto disqualify." See Answer Answer at
at 119 (Jul. 29,
9 (Jul. ,r
29, 2024).
2024).
24 udgeTolentino jg Judge Tolentinowas wasassigned
assigned to
to his
his matter
matter on December 13,
on December 13, 2022,
2022, more
more than one and
than one and aa half
half (1.5)
(1.5)
25 26 years ears before the the OAG
OAG filed
filed their
their Objection
Objection on
on July
July 19,
19, 2024.
2024. Indeed, the OAG had Indeed, the had several several
26 27 opportunities opportunitiesto toraise
raise the
the issue JudgeTolentino's issue upon Judge Tolentino's assignment and throughout assignment and throughoutthe thefollowing
following year.
28
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG'
OAG'ss Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&& Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People of
People of Guam v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Aroma Enyinnaya Akoma
Page 7 of12
of 12
1 Timeliness also also weighs heavily against against the OAG
OAG considering
considering the
the issue ofdisqualification issue of disqualification
2 based ased on shared shared familial relationships involving Attorney familial relationships Attorney General General Moylan's
Moylan'sadult
adultchildren/Judge
children/Judge
3 olentino's adult Tolentino's adult step-children and andAttorney
Attorney General
GeneralMoylan's
Moylan's ex-wife/Judge
ex-wife/JudgeTolentino's
Tolentino's wife was
4 addressed atataameeting addressed meetingin in December
December2022. meeting, Attorney General 2022. In that meeting, General Moylan Moylan agreed
agreed that
that
5 6 there here was was no longer any conflict of of interest adversely affect Judge interest which would adversely JudgeTolentino's Tolentino's ability to
6 7 preside reside over cases cases in which
which Attorney
Attorney General
General Moylan,
Moylan, as
as the
the Attorney
Attorney General
General of
of Guam,
Guam, was
was
·nvolved. Id. at ,r,r 8 involved. W 6-7.
6-7. The
TheOAG
OAGstuck
stuckby
bythis position for
this position forover
overone
oneand
and aa half
half (1 .5) years,
(1.5) years, failing
failing to
9 file 9 fileany anyobjection objectionbased
based on
on familial ties until
familial ties until July 2024. Having failed July 2024. failed to to timely
timely raise
raise the
the objection,
10 10 the OAG OAG has has waived
waived its
its current
current disqualification
disqualification request. See Van Dax Dox v.
v. Super
SuperCr.,
Ct.,2008
2008Guam
Guam77,i
11
l11l 12 44. 12 13 The timing of ofthe
the OAG's
OAG'sObjection
Objectionisisfurther
furthersuspect
suspectbecause
because itit comes
comes after
after several
several hearings
hearings
13 14 before eforeJudge Judge Tolentino,
Tolentino, including
including aa week-long jury jury trial
trial that
that resulted in aamistrial.
resulted in mistrial. This is precisely 14 15 the hecircumstance circumstancethat that the
the Guam Supreme Court
Courtprohibited.
prohibited. SeeSan
San Union, Inc. v. Arnold, Arnold, 2017 Guam
15
16 10 ,r 27 ("to avoid the possibility of 'lying in wake, raising the recusal issue only after learning 16 10 ii 27 ("to avoid the possibility of 'lying in wake, raising the recusal issue only after learning the
17 court's ruling on the merits."') (internal citations omitted). Rather than present the grounds for 17 court's ruling on the merits."') (internal citations omitted). Rather than present the grounds 18 disqualification at the earliest practicable opportunity, the People waited one and and aahalf
half (1.5)
(l .5)
18 disqualification at the earliest practicable opportunity, the People waited for over 19 years, until a jury trial trial had finished,
finished, before
before raising
raising their
their Objection.
Objection. Therefore,
Therefore, the
the Court
Court finds
finds the
19 ears, until a the 20 OAG's Objection is procedurally defective and effectively waived. 20 OAG's Objection is procedurally and effectively
21 III.
III. The The Objection
Objection is is substantially substantiallydefective
defective because:
because:
21 a. Jude
Jude Tolentino
Tolentino isisnot
notcompelled
compelled totodisclose
disclose his
his personal
personal connection to Attorney connection to
22 General General Moylan
Moylan under
under the
the clear
clear language of 77 G.C.A.
language of G.C.A. §§
§§6105
6105 and
and 6106.
6106.
23 The only The only circumstance in §§ 6105 circumstance in 6105 requiring requiring disqualification (absent aa waiver disqualification (absent waiver following following
24
25 disclosure) 25 disclosure) involving involvingthe
the judge's
judge's spouse
spouse is
is§§ 6l05(b)(5) whenthe
6105(b)(5)when thespouse spouse is
is any of: (A)
any of: (A)aaparty
party to
to the
the
26 proceeding, roceeding, or or an
an officer,
officer, director,
director, or
or trustee
trustee of a party;
party, (B) acting
acting as a lawyer
lawyer in the
the proceeding;
proceeding;(C)
(C)
27 27 known own by by the the Judge
Judge to
to have
have an
an interest
interest that
that could be substantially affected by substantially affected by the the outcome
outcome of the
28
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&& Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People of
People of Guam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Aroma Akoma
Page Page 8 of12
of 12
11 proceeding, roceeding;oror(D)
(D)isistotothe
theJudge's
Judge's knowledge
knowledgelikely
likelytotobe
beaamaterial
material witness
witness in
in the
the proceeding. See
2 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6l05(b)(5).
6105(b)(5).
3 Tolentino's spouse
Judge Tolentino's spouse isis not not aa party
party to
to the
the proceeding,
proceeding, or
or an
an officer,
officer, director,
director, or
or trustee of
4 a party. She is not acting as a lawyer party. She lawyer in in the
the proceeding,
proceeding, nor is
is she
she known
known by Judge Tolentino to have 5 aninterest 6 an interest that could be substantially affected by that could by the outcome of the the proceeding. She is
proceeding. She is not, to Judge 6 material witness
77 Tolentino's knowledge, likely to be a material witness in in the
the proceeding. Therefore, none of proceeding. Therefore, of these
88 circumstances exist to to require
require that
that Judge
Judge Tolentino
Tolentino invoke
invoke the mandatory disclosure requirements of of
99 §6106.
§ 6106.
10 10 The circumstances
circumstances of
of the
the OAG's objection differ OAG's objection differnotably notablyfrom
fromthethecircumstances
circumstances in People
People v.
v.
11 11 antos, where 12 Santos, the Guam where the Guam Supreme
Supreme Court
Court found
found the
the provisions
provisionsofof §§ 6l05(b)
6105(b) required
required aa judge's
judge's
12 13 disqualification (absent 13 disqualification (absent aa waiver waiver following
followingdisclosure)
disclosure)when
whenthat
thatjudge
judgewas
wasrelated
related within
within the
the third
third
14 degree 14 degree to to the
the Chief
Chief Prosecutor
Prosecutor of
of the
the OAG. People v.
OAG. See People v. Santos, Santos, 2018 Guam 12
12,1]8.8. The Guam
Guam
15 Supreme 15 SupremeCourt Courtconcluded
concludedthat
thatthe
the Chief
ChiefProsecutor
Prosecutor was
was acting
acting as
as a lawyer in the proceeding, even if 16 16 they hey did did not notpersonally
personally participate
participate in the
the case,
case, due
due toto their
theirsupervisory
supervisory responsibility responsibility over the
17 12 performance erformance of of the
the attorney
attorney in the proceeding. Id. at at,1113.
13. This same logic cannot be extended to 18 19 Attorney ttomey General General Moylan,
Moylan, despite
despite any
any supervisory
supervisory involvement he may may have
have in
in this
this case,
case, because
19 20 ttomey General 20 Attorney General Moylan is not related related within
within the third
third degree
degree to
to Judge
Judge Tolentino. Therefore, 7 Tolentino. Therefore,
21 21 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§ 6l05(b)
6105(b) does
does not
not require
require Judge
Judge Tolentino's
Tolentino's disqualification disqualification here.
here.
22 b. Applying Applying the
the "appearance
"appearance of
of impropriety"
impropriety" standard,
standard, Judge
Judge Tolentino
Tolentino was
was not
not
23 required required to
to disclose under77G.C.A.
disclose under G.C.A. §§6105(a).
24 24 Section 6105(a) requires requires that "any
"any judge
judge shall disqualify himself himself or herself in any proceeding proceeding
25 in·n which 25 whichhis his or
orher
herimpartiality
impartiality might
might reasonably questioned". See 77 G.C.A.
reasonably be questioned". G.C.A. §§ 6105(a).
6l05(a). When
When
26 considering 26 consideringdisqualification disqualification under
under§§ 6105(a),
6105(a), "what
"what matters
matters is
is not
not 'actual
'actual bias," but 'the
bias,' but 'the appearance appearance
27 of 27 of bia bias."' See Van Dox v. Super Cr., Ct., 2008 Guam
Guam 77,
1132 (citing Dizon v. Super. Cr. (People), 1998 Ct. (People), 1998
28 Guam 28 Guam33, 1110 n.3).
n.3). The
The appearance
appearance of
of bias is judged from the standard standard of a "reasonable person"
person" who
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People of
People of Guam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Aroma Enyinnaya Akoma
Page 9 of1212
1 knows ows all allthe
thefacts,
facts,and
andunderstands
understands the "contents of ofthe
thejurisdictions,
jurisdictions, parties,
parties, and
and controversies
controversies
2 involved," including such ·nvolved," including such "realities "realities of the
the Guam judicial system"
system" as the
the relatively small
small number of
number of
3 lawyers awyers in inthe
the Guam and"the
Guam bar and "thenature
natureof
ofGuam
Guamfamilies."
families." Id. ,r 32 (citation Q1132 (citation omitted)
omitted).
4 The Michigan Michigan Supreme
Supreme Court
Court held that "the appearance of impropriety" standard appearance of standard applies only 5 where herethere thereisisno
no clear
clearrule
ruleor
orcanon
canon pertaining
pertaining to
to the
the subject
subject matter. See Adair v. State State of
ofMicnigan
Michigan
6 6 Dept.
ept. of ofEducation,
Education, 474 Mich. 1027, 1027, 1039 (Jan.31,
1039 (Jan. 31,2006).
2006). The Court reasoned reasoned "specific
"specific court
court rules
rules
7 or or canons canons that that pertain
pertain to
to aa subject
subject and
and that
that delineate
delineate what
what is
is permitted
permitted and
and prohibited
prohibited judicial
judicial
8 conduct...
conduct. . would wouldbe
beof
oflittle
littleconsequence
consequenceififthey
theycould
couldalways
alwaysbe
becountermanded the vagaries countermanded by the vagaries of of
9 an an 'appearance of impropriety'
'appearance of impropriety' standard".
standard". Id.
Q atat 1039.
1039.
10 10 In instantcase, In this instant case,the
thenon-disclosure
non-disclosureofofthe
therelationship
relationshipcomplained
complained oby the
ofby theOAG
OAG is covered
covered
11 11 byy §§6105(5), 6105(5), which
whichspecifically
specificallylays
laysout
outwhen
when aa judge's
judge'srelationship
relationship to
to aa lawyer
lawyer in
in the
the proceeding
proceeding
12 12 warrants arrants that judge's disqualification. Importantly, that judge's Importantly,by bylisting
listingthe
theprohibited
prohibited relationships
relationships between
between a
13 13 lawyer awyerand and the
the judge,
judge, §§ 6105(5)
6105(5) also
also states
states which
which relationships are permitted.
relationships are permitted. Section Section 6105(5)
6105(5) lists
lists
14 14 several several prohibited prohibited relationships, relationships, and being the and being the ex-partner
ex-partner of
of the
the judge's
judge's spouse
spouse is not one of
of them.
them.
15 15 Because ecause §§6105(5)
6105(5)delineates
delineates what
what is
is and
and isn't
isn't aa prohibited
prohibited relationship,
relationship, the
the OAG
OAGcannot
cannot negate
negate that
that
16 16 rule le by by invoking invokingthe
the "appearance
"appearance of
ofimpropriety"
impropriety"standard.
standard.
17 17 c.
c. Under
Under an
an"objectively
"objectivelyreasonable
reasonable person"
person" standard,
standard, Judge
Judge Tolentino
Tolentino was not
not
18 18 required required to
to disqualify
disqualify himself
himselfin
in this
this ease.
case.
19 19 Even Even ifif §§6l05(a)
6105(a)was
waspermitted
permittedtotobypass
bypassthe
theclear
clearrule
rulepertaining
pertaining to
to this
this challenged
challenged
20 relationship, elationship, no no objectively
objectivelyreasonable
reasonable person
person would
would question
question Judge Tolentino's impartiality here.
Judge Tolentino's
21 The American Bar Association ("ABA")
("ABA") acknowledged
acknowledgedthat
that"judges
"judgesare
areordinarily
ordinarilyin
inthe
the best
best
22 position ositionto toassess
assess whether
whether their
their impartiality
impartiality might
might reasonably
reasonably be
be questioned
questioned when lawyers or or parties
parties
23 with ithwhom whom they they have
have relationships ... appear before them."
appear before them." See ABA ABAFormal
FormalOp.
Op. 488
488 (Sep. 5,
5, 2019).
24 The heABA ABAalso alsonotes
notesthat
that"in
"insmaller
smallercommunities
communitiesand
andrelatively
relativelysparsely-populated sparsely-populated districts, districts, judges
25 may ay have have social social and
and personal
personal contacts
contacts with
with lawyers
lawyers and
and parties
parties that
that are
are unavoidable.
unavoidable. In that
that
26 circumstance, too strict circumstance, too strict aa disqualyication disqualification standard standard would be impractical to to enforce
enforce and
and would
would
27 potentially disruptthe otentially disrupt theadministration administrationofof justice."Id.
justice." Q (emphasis added). The ABA also (emphasis added). also recognizes recognizes
28 that hat over over time time relationships
relationships change "or may have ended change "or ended sufficiently far far in
in the
the past
past that
that it is not a
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People
People of
ofGuam v.
v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya
Enyinnaya Akoma
Aroma
Page 10 of 12
11 current current concern when whenviewed
viewedobjectively."
objectively." Id. "Finally, "Finally,judges
judges must
must avoid
avoid disqualifying themselves themselves
oo quickly 2 too quicklyor ortoo
toooften
oftenlest
lestlitigants beencouraged litigantsbe encouraged to to use
use disqualification
disqualification motions
motions as
as a means of
means of
3 judge-shopping, ·udge-shopping, or orother
otherjudges
judges in
in the
the same
same court ... become overburdened."
overburdened." Id.
4 Adopting the Adopting the recommendations recommendations of the ABA ABA in
inits
itsFormal
FormalOpinion
Opinion488,
488, based
based on
on the obi ective
objective
5 reasonable easonable person standard, andconsidering standard, and consideringthe theAnswer
Answerfiled
filed by Judge
Judge Tolentino and
and the judicial
6 community community and and context
context in which
which the
the disqualification
disqualification is sought, the Court sought, the Court makes the following makes the
7 findings:
findings:
8 • The circumstances previously requiring circumstances previously requiring Judge JudgeTolentino
Tolentino to
to disqualify
disqualify himself have
9 changed and, by changed and, by Attorney
Attorney General
General Moylan's
Moylan's own
own admission
admission during
during the
the meeting
meeting
10 10 between between himself, his staff, Judge Tolentino, and the court and the courtstaff,
staff, any
anyconflict
conflict relating to
11 the familial association between between Judge
JudgeTolentino
Tolentino and
andAttorney
Attorney General
General Moylan
Moylan "no
12 12 Answer at ,r existed." See Answer
longer existed." 1]77(Jul.
(Jul.29,
29,2024).
2024). Therefore,
Therefore, Judge Tolentino is not Judge Tolentino
13 13 required to disqualify required to disqualify himself himself under§
under § 6105(a).
6l05(a)
14 14 • The relationship between Attorney Attorney General
General Moylan
Moylanand
and Mrs.
Mrs. Tolentino
Tolentinoended
endedon
onJune
June
15 15 13, 1997. Id. at ,r1114.
13, 1997. Therefore, the 14. Therefore, the relationship relationship has ended
ended sufficiently
sufficiently far
far in
in the
the past
past
16 16 that itit is not not aa current
currentconcern
concernwhen
whenviewed
viewedobjectively.
objectively.
17 17 • Attorney General Moylan Moylan and
and Mrs. Tolentino's
Tolentino's children
children are
are now grown
grown adults living
adults living
18 18 .on their own, which which poses another significant change in relationships. ,r,r 7, 14.
relationships. Id. at11117, 14.
19 19 • In In Guam's small legal community community and
and with a trial
trial court bench
bench consisting
consistingof
of only four
20 (4)
(4) dedicated
dedicated criminal
criminal court
court dockets, requiring Judge Tolentino, who is one of the four Judge Tolentino,
21 (4)
(4) judges
judges assigned to the
assigned to criminal docket, the criminal docket, to
to disqualify
disqualify himself
himself pursuant
pursuantto§
to §6105(a)
6l05(a)
22 from all all cases
cases in
in which
which Attorney
Attorney General
General Moylan
Moylan represents the People of represents the of Guam Guam
23 would: (a) be impractical to enforce, (b) negatively negativelyimpact
impact the
the efficient
efficientadministration
administration
24 of ofjustice,
justice, and
and (c)
(c)lead
leadtotojudge-shopping
judge-shoppingand/or
and/or overburden
overburden the judges in
in the
the same
same
25 court.
court.
26 CONCLUSION 27 27 For For the
the reasons
reasons stated above, the Court DENIES the OAG's OAG's Objection.
Objection. Judge
Judge Tolentino
Tolentino is
28 not 28 notdisqualified disqualifiedunder under 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A.§§
§§6105(a)
6105(a)oror(b) frompresiding (b)from presidingover
overthis
thiscase
caseon
onthe
thegrounds
grounds that
that
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement
Statement ofof Objection
Objection 77G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&&Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22,People of Guam v. Ugochukwu People of Guam v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya Akoma Page 11 of12
1
1 he has hasaafamilial familial relationship
relationshipto
toAttorney
Attorney General Moylan
Moylan based uponJudge
JudgeTolentino's
Tolentino's relationships
2 with withAttorney AttorneyGeneral
General Moylan's
Moylan'sbiological
biologicalchildren
children and
and his former
former wife.
wife. Even
Even ififthere
there were
were such
such
3 grounds for disclosure or disqualification, which grounds for which this this Court
Court has
has found
found there
there are
are none, the untimely
4 Objection Objectiontiled filedby
bythe
theOAG
OAGconstitutes
constitutesaawaiver
waiverofofany
anysuch
such disqualifying factor.
factor.
5 August 29,
29, 2024
2024
6 IT IS IS SO
SO ORDERED
ORDEREDthis
this-----~....,.,
7
8
9
l0 10 HONORABLE ALBERTO ALBERT() C. c. LAMORENA,
LAMORENA, III
Presiding Judge, Superior Superior Court
Court of Guam
Guam
l11l
12 12
la 13
l4 14
l5 15
16 16 l7 17
lb 18
l9 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Decision Decision and Order Denying and Order Denying the
the OAG's
OAG's Statement of Objection Statement of Objection 77 G.C.A.
G.C.A. §§6107
6107&& Motion
Motion to
to Disqualify
Disqualify
CM0363-22, People
People of
ofGuam v. Ugochukwu Enyinnaya AkomaAroma Page 12 of 12