FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
2022 HER -3 PH I: 315 1 CLERKOFCOURT 2 62-1 3
4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 5
6 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, ) CR1M1NAL CASE NO.: CF0276-21 ) GPD Report Nos.: 21-13493/21-13558 7 vs. ) s ) CHRIS JUNIOR ANDERSON ) DECISION AND ORDER 9 TEDTAOTAO, ) RE: PEOPLE'S MOTION FOR aka Chris Anderson Tedtaotao, Jr., ) DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 DOB: 03/07/1992 or 09/07/1992 ) ) Defendant. ) )
13 INTRODUCTION 14 This matter is before the Honorable Maria T. Cenzon on the Defendant's motion to 15 dismiss this matter with prejudice. This Court previously dismissed the Indictment in this case 16
17 due to the unavailability of the Victim to appear for trial as scheduled in November, 2021. The
18 People sought to dismiss the matter without prejudice while the Defendant asked for prejudice
19 to attach, thereby preventing his prosecution. The parties submitted briefs in support of their 20 respective positions and, on December 10, 2021, the Court took the matter under advisement 21 22 pursuant to CVR 7.1(€)(6)(D) of the LOCAL RULES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
23 GUAM and Administrative Rule Nos. 06-001 (Jan. 14, 2005) and 13-003(C)(May 13, 2013),
24 upon the closing of the pleadings. Aler considering the briefs on file with the Court and after 25
28 People v. Tediaalao, CF0276-2 l Order RE: People 's Marion and Order for Dismissal Page l of 5 reviewing the applicable statutes and case law, the Court now issues this Decision and Order l
2 GRANTING the People's motion to dismiss without prejudice.
3 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 4 The six-month lifespan of this criminal case began on June 5, 2021, with the filing of the 5 Magistrate's Complaint, followed by the Indictment on June 14, 2021, until this Court 6
dismissed it on the request of the People on October 25, 2021. Hrg. on Pre-Trial Corrence 7
8 (Oct. 25, 2021). Defendant Despite the relatively short time between the filing of charges
9 against the Defendant and the dismissal, the Defendant, who had also asserted his right to a 10 speedy trial) brought several pre-n'ial motions, including his Motion to Dismiss the First and 11 SecondCharges in the Indictment (the "Motion to Dismiss") on June 29, 2021, which the court 12
13 granted, in part, and denied, in part. See, Decision and Order: Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss The First
14 and Scond Charges or In the Alterative for a Bill of Particulars (Oct. 20, 202l).2 15 In addition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, the Defendant also tiled several motions 16 in limine, including: Motion in Limine to Exclude Other Acts Evidence, Motion in Limine to 17 preclude the Prosecution from Introducing All evidence not Discovered to Defendant As of July 18
19 2, 2021, Motion in Limine to Prohibit Reference to Probation or Parole Status, and a Motion in
20 Limine to Prohibit Hearsay (Crawford). The People were also fully engaged in the prosecution 21
23 1 Defendant asserted his right to speedy trial pursuant to 8 GCA § 80.60 on June 25, 202 l . LI The Decision and Order, which is incorporated herein by reference, erroneously indicates that the hearing on the 24 Motion ro Dismiss was held on June 29, 2021. However, the hearing was on July 29, 2021, and the Defendant had filed his motion on June 29, 202 l. In any event, on July 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Vacating Jury Selection 25 and Trial and Tolling Speedy Trial (Pending Motion to Dismiss) finding that good cause supported vacating the jury selection originally scheduled for July 14, 2021 because the motion filed by the Defendant was beneficial to 26 him, as it could ultimately dispose of the charges which inured to his benefit. Order at p. 2 (citing People v. Guerrero, 2017 Guam 5 11 i7). 27
28 People v. Tedfaomu, CF0276-21 Order RE: People 's M o tio n and Order for Dismissal Page 2 of 5 of this case, timely filing its People's Preliminary Witness List on July I, 2021, and its Exhibit l
2 List on July 13, 2021.
3 Following the Court's ruling on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on October 20, 4 2021, trial was set to commence on November 3, 2021. Amended Criminal Trial Seized. Order 5 [Asserted] (Oct. 20, 2021). In preparation for trial, on October 22, 2021, the People spoke ro the 6 7 Victim about the upcoming trial and returning to Guam. Although the Victim indicated she was
8 willing to travel to Guam, she did not have sufficient child care in order to leave her young
9 children in the U.S. Mainland, where she was then-located, in time to travel for the November
10 trial. People's Mot. and Order to Dismiss Without Prejudice (Oct. 22, 2021). On this basis, the 11 People sought and order of the Court dismissing the matter without prejudice. While the 12
13 Defendant did not oppose dismissal, he seeks dismissal with prejudice.
14 LAW AND ANALYSIS 15 A. Dismissal of this Matter Requires Leave of Court 16 Title 8 GCA § 80.70(a) outlines the procedure under which the People's Motion is brought: 17 The prosecuting attorney may with leave of court tile a dismissal of an indictment, 18 information or complaint and the prosecution shall thereupon terminate. Such a 19 dismissal may not be filed during the trial without the consent of the defendant. The prosecuting attorney shall file a statement of his reasons for seeking dismissal when he Z0 applies for leave to file a dismissal and where leave is granted the courts order shall set forth the reasons for granting such leave. 21
22 This section clearly establishes that "[b]ecause leave of court is required, the dismissal under
23 section 80.70(a) is an act of the court." People v. Gutierrez, 2005 Guam 19 1] 31. This rule ZN marks a change from the common law rule of noble prosequi which has been abandoned in 25
28 People v. Tedlaolao, CF0276-2I Order RE: People 's Motion and Order for Dismissal Page 3 of 5 Guam pursuant to 8 GCA § 80.803 and which was a power once vested in the prosecuting 1
2 attorney to dismiss a criminal case in his or her sole discretion. See Gutierrez 1128 n. 3, People
3 v. Riot, 2008 Guam 22 fl21, and People v. Flores, 2009 Guam 221]23. 4 B. The Court Presumes Good Faith by the People in Bringing the Motion and the 5 Defendant Must Rebut Such Presumption For a Dismissal With Prejudice.
6 Although the People of Guam no longer have the unfettered discretion to dismiss a case 7 under its common law power of noble prosequi, Guam law analogizes 8 GCA § 80.70(a) 8
motions to those brought und er Rule 4 8 (a) of the Fed eral Rules of Criminal P roced ure 9
10 (Gutierrez 1]48) and Guam adopts the federal presumption that the prosecutor brings the motion
"in good faith and in the proper discharge of his duties." Gutierrez 'll 51 (quoting US. v. Greater
12 Eloise, Skirt & Neckwear Contractors Association, 228 F. Supp. 483, 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1964)). 13 See also, Id. at 1[ 52 ("The circuit courts have universally held that the prosecution is entitled to 14 a presumption of good faith when bringing a Rule 48(a) motion and the motion should generally 15
16 be granted as a matter of course."). The presumption, however, is not absolute, and "is rebutted
17 upon a showing of a lack of good faith." Gutierrez 1] 53 (citing United States v. Salinas, 693 18 F.2d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 1982)). This good faith presumption may be rebutted by a finding of 19 considerations "clearly contrary to the public interest"4 or if the dismissal "would be clearly 20
contrary to manifest public interest...".5 21
22 Although Defendant's counsel argues that "there is little to no chance that the Govemlent
23 will refile these charges" against the Defendant because the Victim has permanently relocated to 24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
2022 HER -3 PH I: 315 1 CLERKOFCOURT 2 62-1 3
4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 5
6 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, ) CR1M1NAL CASE NO.: CF0276-21 ) GPD Report Nos.: 21-13493/21-13558 7 vs. ) s ) CHRIS JUNIOR ANDERSON ) DECISION AND ORDER 9 TEDTAOTAO, ) RE: PEOPLE'S MOTION FOR aka Chris Anderson Tedtaotao, Jr., ) DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 DOB: 03/07/1992 or 09/07/1992 ) ) Defendant. ) )
13 INTRODUCTION 14 This matter is before the Honorable Maria T. Cenzon on the Defendant's motion to 15 dismiss this matter with prejudice. This Court previously dismissed the Indictment in this case 16
17 due to the unavailability of the Victim to appear for trial as scheduled in November, 2021. The
18 People sought to dismiss the matter without prejudice while the Defendant asked for prejudice
19 to attach, thereby preventing his prosecution. The parties submitted briefs in support of their 20 respective positions and, on December 10, 2021, the Court took the matter under advisement 21 22 pursuant to CVR 7.1(€)(6)(D) of the LOCAL RULES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
23 GUAM and Administrative Rule Nos. 06-001 (Jan. 14, 2005) and 13-003(C)(May 13, 2013),
24 upon the closing of the pleadings. Aler considering the briefs on file with the Court and after 25
28 People v. Tediaalao, CF0276-2 l Order RE: People 's Marion and Order for Dismissal Page l of 5 reviewing the applicable statutes and case law, the Court now issues this Decision and Order l
2 GRANTING the People's motion to dismiss without prejudice.
3 PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 4 The six-month lifespan of this criminal case began on June 5, 2021, with the filing of the 5 Magistrate's Complaint, followed by the Indictment on June 14, 2021, until this Court 6
dismissed it on the request of the People on October 25, 2021. Hrg. on Pre-Trial Corrence 7
8 (Oct. 25, 2021). Defendant Despite the relatively short time between the filing of charges
9 against the Defendant and the dismissal, the Defendant, who had also asserted his right to a 10 speedy trial) brought several pre-n'ial motions, including his Motion to Dismiss the First and 11 SecondCharges in the Indictment (the "Motion to Dismiss") on June 29, 2021, which the court 12
13 granted, in part, and denied, in part. See, Decision and Order: Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss The First
14 and Scond Charges or In the Alterative for a Bill of Particulars (Oct. 20, 202l).2 15 In addition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, the Defendant also tiled several motions 16 in limine, including: Motion in Limine to Exclude Other Acts Evidence, Motion in Limine to 17 preclude the Prosecution from Introducing All evidence not Discovered to Defendant As of July 18
19 2, 2021, Motion in Limine to Prohibit Reference to Probation or Parole Status, and a Motion in
20 Limine to Prohibit Hearsay (Crawford). The People were also fully engaged in the prosecution 21
23 1 Defendant asserted his right to speedy trial pursuant to 8 GCA § 80.60 on June 25, 202 l . LI The Decision and Order, which is incorporated herein by reference, erroneously indicates that the hearing on the 24 Motion ro Dismiss was held on June 29, 2021. However, the hearing was on July 29, 2021, and the Defendant had filed his motion on June 29, 202 l. In any event, on July 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Vacating Jury Selection 25 and Trial and Tolling Speedy Trial (Pending Motion to Dismiss) finding that good cause supported vacating the jury selection originally scheduled for July 14, 2021 because the motion filed by the Defendant was beneficial to 26 him, as it could ultimately dispose of the charges which inured to his benefit. Order at p. 2 (citing People v. Guerrero, 2017 Guam 5 11 i7). 27
28 People v. Tedfaomu, CF0276-21 Order RE: People 's M o tio n and Order for Dismissal Page 2 of 5 of this case, timely filing its People's Preliminary Witness List on July I, 2021, and its Exhibit l
2 List on July 13, 2021.
3 Following the Court's ruling on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on October 20, 4 2021, trial was set to commence on November 3, 2021. Amended Criminal Trial Seized. Order 5 [Asserted] (Oct. 20, 2021). In preparation for trial, on October 22, 2021, the People spoke ro the 6 7 Victim about the upcoming trial and returning to Guam. Although the Victim indicated she was
8 willing to travel to Guam, she did not have sufficient child care in order to leave her young
9 children in the U.S. Mainland, where she was then-located, in time to travel for the November
10 trial. People's Mot. and Order to Dismiss Without Prejudice (Oct. 22, 2021). On this basis, the 11 People sought and order of the Court dismissing the matter without prejudice. While the 12
13 Defendant did not oppose dismissal, he seeks dismissal with prejudice.
14 LAW AND ANALYSIS 15 A. Dismissal of this Matter Requires Leave of Court 16 Title 8 GCA § 80.70(a) outlines the procedure under which the People's Motion is brought: 17 The prosecuting attorney may with leave of court tile a dismissal of an indictment, 18 information or complaint and the prosecution shall thereupon terminate. Such a 19 dismissal may not be filed during the trial without the consent of the defendant. The prosecuting attorney shall file a statement of his reasons for seeking dismissal when he Z0 applies for leave to file a dismissal and where leave is granted the courts order shall set forth the reasons for granting such leave. 21
22 This section clearly establishes that "[b]ecause leave of court is required, the dismissal under
23 section 80.70(a) is an act of the court." People v. Gutierrez, 2005 Guam 19 1] 31. This rule ZN marks a change from the common law rule of noble prosequi which has been abandoned in 25
28 People v. Tedlaolao, CF0276-2I Order RE: People 's Motion and Order for Dismissal Page 3 of 5 Guam pursuant to 8 GCA § 80.803 and which was a power once vested in the prosecuting 1
2 attorney to dismiss a criminal case in his or her sole discretion. See Gutierrez 1128 n. 3, People
3 v. Riot, 2008 Guam 22 fl21, and People v. Flores, 2009 Guam 221]23. 4 B. The Court Presumes Good Faith by the People in Bringing the Motion and the 5 Defendant Must Rebut Such Presumption For a Dismissal With Prejudice.
6 Although the People of Guam no longer have the unfettered discretion to dismiss a case 7 under its common law power of noble prosequi, Guam law analogizes 8 GCA § 80.70(a) 8
motions to those brought und er Rule 4 8 (a) of the Fed eral Rules of Criminal P roced ure 9
10 (Gutierrez 1]48) and Guam adopts the federal presumption that the prosecutor brings the motion
"in good faith and in the proper discharge of his duties." Gutierrez 'll 51 (quoting US. v. Greater
12 Eloise, Skirt & Neckwear Contractors Association, 228 F. Supp. 483, 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1964)). 13 See also, Id. at 1[ 52 ("The circuit courts have universally held that the prosecution is entitled to 14 a presumption of good faith when bringing a Rule 48(a) motion and the motion should generally 15
16 be granted as a matter of course."). The presumption, however, is not absolute, and "is rebutted
17 upon a showing of a lack of good faith." Gutierrez 1] 53 (citing United States v. Salinas, 693 18 F.2d 348, 352 (5th Cir. 1982)). This good faith presumption may be rebutted by a finding of 19 considerations "clearly contrary to the public interest"4 or if the dismissal "would be clearly 20
contrary to manifest public interest...".5 21
22 Although Defendant's counsel argues that "there is little to no chance that the Govemlent
23 will refile these charges" against the Defendant because the Victim has permanently relocated to 24
25 3 "The entry of a noble prosequi is abolished, and a prosecuting attorney cannot discontinue or abandon a prosecution for any offense, except as provided in § 80.70." 26 4 Id. 'H54 (quoting Salinas at 35 l)). 5 Gutierrez 1154 (quoting United States v. Rush, 240 F.3d 729, 730 (Sth Cir. 2001). 27
is People v. Tedmotao,CF0276-2 l Order RE: People 's Molina and Order for Dismissal Page 4 o f f the U.S. mainland with no intention to return to Guam. Def 's Brief at p. 3. This argument is l
2 contrary to the information presented to the Court by the People during the hearing that the
3 Victim is willing to return to Guam if given adequate notice of the trial dates and, further, that 4 she will remain in touch with the Victims Service Center because she desires to return to Guam 5 in the future. People's Brief at p. 4. The Defendant has not provided the Court with any 6
evidence rebutting the presumption of good faith. 7
8 Equally important, the Defendant does not suffer nor has he established any prejudice
9 resulting from the dismissal without prejudice of this matter, as the Defendant was immediately
10 re le ase d firm pre -trial de te n tion u pon th e filin g of th e Pe ople 's motion an d, fu rth e r, D e fe n dan t 11 has the opportunity to file a motion for expungement of this matter upon the expiration of the 12
13 applicable Statute of Limitations, pursuant to 8 GCA § 11.10 (3), which is a civil proceeding.
14 People v. Lau, 2007 Guam 4 H 6, n. 3. 15 CONCLUSION 16 For the above reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the People's Motion and Order 17 for Dismissal Without Prejudice is GRANTED. 18
19 so ORDERED this MAR 032022 } nuncio fund, October 25, 2021.
21 H0 I LE MARIA T. CENZON 22 SERVICE VIA E-MAIL Judge, Superior Court of Guam I acknowledge ThaI an electronic 23 copy of the original was e-mailed10:
/MU HAD 24
25 Date:1/7/2; Time:lI'l2f»`
26 M Deputy Clerk, Superior Cour\ of Guam
28 People v. Tedmotao, CF0276-21 Order RE: People 's Motion and Order for Dismissal Page 5 off