, r"- a l;1+¢ e~. I I1.-. 1 _ ,- _ »*\ . t' SU K, s '\ L10 U r~2T =::.=" C *g . . J I L_.: f
1 O F LE LJ :'\§
2 Jfi.N 31I EH 2024J!8.?3 mu M:1 §: 9: 1+ 466 3 CLERl, OF CLERK OF COURT COURT 4 \__I i ;. i <,.._,_ 5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7
8 PEOPLE PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0713-23 9 vs. 10 10 DECISION AND ORDER 11 II TROY TROYASKAS ASK.ASaka akaRolando RolandoAfkas Atkas Jackson Jackson 12 12 aka Raul Jones aka Randy Jones aka Randy Frank Frank aka Roland Roland Jackson, Jackson, 13 1
14 14 Defendant. Defendant.
15 15 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION 16 This matter came before the Honorable Vernon Vemon P. Perez on January 16, 16, 2024, for hearing 17 17 on Defendant TROY ASK.AS ASKAS aka akaRolando Rolando Afkas Atkas Jackson Jackson aka aka Raul Raul Jones aka Randy Frank 18 18 Roland Jackson's ("Defendant") aka Roland Motion to ("Defendant") Motion to Suppress Suppress Evidence. Evidence. Present Present were were Assistant Assistant 19 Attorney General Attorney General Sean E. E. Brown on on behalf behalf of of the the People People of of Guam Guam ("the ("the Government") Government") and 20 Defendant with Defendant with counsel counsel Assistant Assistant Public Public Defender Defender Alisha Alisha Molyneux. Molyneux. Having Having reviewed the the 21 pleadings, the arguments presented, and the record, the Court now now issues the the following following Decision 22 22 and Order. 23 23 BACK GR O U ND BACKGROUND 24 24 On November November 13, 2023, Defendant Defendant was indicted indicted with one count count of of Possession of a 25 25 Schedule II Controlled Substance (As aa Third Third Degree Degree Felony) Felony) and and one one count count of of Operation Operation of a 26 26 Motor Vehicle without without aa Driver's Dover's License License (As a Violation). Violation). (Indictment, Nov. 13, (Indictment, Nov. 13, 2023). 2023). These 27 27 charges stem from the the discovery discovery of suspected suspected methamphetamines methamphetamines in Defendant's vehicle vehicle after after the 28
People People v. v. Askas Askas Case No. No. CF0713-23 cF0713-23 Decision Decision and and Order
Page 1 10 I ofl0 1 effectuation of effectuation of a traffic traffic stop stop on on or or about aboutNovember November2,2,2023. 2023. (Deel. (Decl. of Gloria Gloria A.L. A.L. Rudolph, Rudolph,
2 Magistrate's Con Magistrate's Compl., Nov. 4, pl., Nov. 4, 2023). 2023). Defendant Defendantdid didnot not have have aa valid driver's license, registration, driver's license,
3 insurance on or insurance onhim. him. Id. Id
4 On November 21, 2023, November 21, 2023, at Arraignment, Defendant Defendant asserted asserted his right to a speedy trial.
5 On December ll, 11,2023, 2023,Defendant Defendant filed filedthe the instant instant Motion. On OnDecember December22, 22, 2023, 2023, the
6 Government filed its Opposition.
7 January 16, On January 16,2024, 2024,the theCourt Courtheard heardsworn swamtestimony testimonyfrom fromPort PortPolice PoliceOfficer Officer Alex Alex
8 Tithingrad Tithingrad ("Officer ("Officer Tithingrad"), Tithingrad"), Port Port Police Police Officer Kylie Kylie Maurer Maurer ("Officer ("Officer Maurer"), Maurer"), and and
9 Defendant. At Defendant. Atthe the hearing, hearing, the the Court Court ascertained ascertained the thefollowing facts:· following facts:'
10 10 1. On l. Onororabout aboutNovember November2,2,2023, 2023,around around 7:00 7:00 p.m., p.m., Officer Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad effectuated effectuated a
11 traffic stop after observing traffic observing a beige beige Nissan Nissan Sentra Sentra on the the road road with with an an expired expired
12 12 registration tag. tag.
13 1 2. Officer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradmet metwith withthe thedriver, driver,aamale maleindividual, individual, who who identified identified himself himself as as
14 14 Randy Frank. Frank. Officer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradidentified identifiedDefendant Defendantininthe thecourtroom courtroom as as the the same same
15 15 individual he pulled over over on November 2.
16 3. Officer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradasked askedDefendant Defendant for for his his identification, identification, proof proofofofinsurance, insurance, and and
17 17 vehicle registration. vehicle registration. Defendant Defendantwas wasunable unable to to provide provideany any of ofthe the documents documents requested. requested.
18 18 Defendant did not not have have any anyform formof of identification.
19 4. The Thevehicle vehiclealso alsohad hada apassenger. passenger. The Thepassenger passenger identified identifiedherself herselfas as Dorissa Dorissa Frank, Frank, 20 which Officer Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad confirmed confirmed through through her FSM passport. passport. Mrs. Mrs. Frank Frank did did not not 21 have a driver's license.
22 5. Officer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradcalled calledGuam GuamPolice PoliceDepartment Departmentdispatch dispatch to to inquire inquire about about the the 23 vehicle. GPD GPDgave gaveOfficer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradthe thename name ofofthe theregistered registered owner owner which which was was
24 not "Randy Frank." Frank." 25 6. 6. When WhenOfficer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradwent wenttotohis his vehicle, vehicle, Officer OfficerMaurer Maurer an°ived to assist. arrived to assist. Officer Officer
26 26 Maurer heard over over the theradio radiothat thatOfficer Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad was conducting conducting a vehicle vehicle pull pull over over
27 and proceeded proceededto tohis hislocation locationto toassist. assist. Officer Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad told told Officer OfficerMaurer Maurerthat that the 28
People v. v. Askers Askas Case No. CF0713-23 Decision and Order
Page 2 of of 10 I 5
1 operator did operator did not not have have any any form form of identification, so Officer Officer Maurer Maurer said said she she would
2 2 speak to to him. him.
3 OfficerMaurer 7. Officer Maurertestified testifiedthat thatshe shewent wentto to speak speak to the the operator operatorwhile whileOfficer Officer Tithingrad
4 was at at his hisvehicle vehicle for for officer safety as officer safety as the area areawas wasdark. dark. Officer Maurer testified Officer Maurer testified that that
5 she assumed assumedOfficer Officer Tithingrad was going to try try to to issue issue a citation.
6 8. 8. The driver of ofthe the vehicle vehicle also also identified identified himself himselfto to Officer OfficerMaurer Maureras as Randy Randy Frank. Frank.
7 9. 9. Officer Maurer Officer Maurer asked asked Defendant why he didn't didn't have have any any identification identification on on him him and and
8 Defendant responded that Defendant responded that he he actually actually didn't didn't possess any identification possess any at all. identification at all. 9 Defendant indicated he was coming from from the the cemetery cemeteryand and that that the the passenger passenger in the 10 vehicle was his his wife. wife.
11 II 10. Officer Maurer 10. During her conversation with Defendant, Officer Maurer noticed noticed that that he he was not able 12 12 to make eye contact with her and andobserved observed him him to to be befidgeting fidgeting with with something something in in both
13 1 hands. Officer hands. OfficerMaurer Maurer testified testifiedthat that she she believed believed Defendant Defendant was was handling handling a cigarette. 14 OfficerMaurer Officer Maurer asked asked Defendant Defendant ififhe he was was okay, okay, to towhich whichhe heresponded responded that that he he was was
15 15 just tired. tired.
16 16 11. OfficerMaurer ll. Officer Defendantififthere askedDefendant Maurerasked therewas wasanything anythingin inthe the vehicle vehiclethat that she she should should
17 17 know about, and Defendant about, and Defendant responded responded that thatthere theremight mightbe be an anairsoft airsoft gun gun or or a pellet
18 18 gun. At this time, gun. time, Officer Maurer instructed instnlcted Defendant Defendanttotoexit exitthe thevehicle. vehicle. Officer
19 told Defendant Maurer told Defendant to to put put both both hands on the the steering steering wheel and open the the door with
20 his left left hand slowly and then step slowly and stepout outand andproceed proceedtotothe rearof therear ofthe thevehicle. vehicle. Defendant
21 complied.
22 12. Officer Maurer 12. Officer Maurerasked asked Defendant ififhe consented patdown consented to a pat downof of his hisbody. body. Defendant
23 agreed. agreed. Officer OfficerMaurer Maurerdid did not not find find anything anything on on him. 24 24 13. Officer 13. Maurer asked Officer Maurer asked Defendant Defendant if he had a firearms firearms identification card. Defendant card. Defendant
25 25 responded that he he did not. not.
26 14. Officer 14. Maurer then Officer Maurer then asked asked Defendant Defendant to search the to search to include the vehicle, to include the the trunk. trunk. 27 Officer OfficerMaurer Maurer testified testifiedthat that Defendant Defendant agreed. 28
Peoplev.v. Askers People Askas Case No. CF0713-23 Decision and Decision and Order
Page 3 of 10 Page 10 1 15. Officer Maurer also asked Defendant if there was was anything else that she should know
2 about and he said that there was a pipe and a syringe and then there was also ice that
3 was in his wallet.
4 16. Officer Maurer testified that she asked Defendant ifthere there was anything else in the car
5 besides the airsoft besides the airsoft or pellet pellet gun because Defendant was because Defendant was still still unable unable to to make eye
6 contact with her. contact with her. Officer Officer Maurer Maurer testified testified that while she was talking to him in the 7 vehicle, she also vehicle, she also noticed that his eyes noticed that eyes were were red red and and pupils pupils were were dilated, dilated, which which 8 indicated to her that he may be under the influence.
9 17. Officer Maurer Maurer testified testified that that she she told told Defendant Defendant that that if if at at any any time he wanted her to
10 stop searching the vehicle he could just let her know.
11 Tithingrad testified 18. Officer Tithingrad testified that that he was going going to issue Defendant Defendant a citation but stopped 12 told him that Defendant mentioned he had something in the because Officer Maurer told 13 1 vehicle ("a pellet gun or something"). Officer OfficerTithingrad Tithingradstopped stopped to to observe observe them for 14 14 officer safety.
15 15 19. Officer 19. Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad testified testified that that when when Officer Officer Maurer Maurer asked asked Defendant Defendant to exit the
16 16 vehicle, everyone went to the rear of the vehicle.
17 17 20. Officer Tithingrad testified testified that he heard Officer Maurer ask Defendant for consent to 18 18 search the vehicle and that he he said said "yes." "yes."
19 19 21. Defendant only 21. Defendant only provided provided verbal verbal consent consent to to the the search search and and did did not sign aa written written 20 consent form. form. 21 22. Officer 22. Officer Maurer Maurer found found the the pipe pipe and and the the syringe syringe between between the the driver's door and the
22 22 steering wheel in a small compartment compartment and a bag with suspected methamphetamine in 23 23 a brown Fendi wallet. 24 24 23. Officer Maurer did not find any identification or credit cards in the wallet. 25 25 24. Officer Maurer testified she asked Defendant if the wallet was his and he said it was.
26 Officer Maurer testified she also asked Defendant for permission to actually open up
27 27 the wallet and he said that it was okay. 28
People People v.v. Askers Askas Case No. No. CF0713-23 Decision Decision andand Order
Page Page 44oflO ofl0 1 25. .Officer Officer Maurer testified that Defendant never withdrew consent of the search of the withdrew consent
2 2 vehicle while she vehicle while she was was searching. searching. 3 26. Officer 26. Maurer testified Officer Maurer testified that that Defendant Defendant was polite polite when when talking talking to to her her and and that that he
4 truthful. seemed truthful.
5 27. When Defendant 27. Defendant was brought to was brought the Central to the Central Precinct, Precinct, he was was identified identified through through
6 fingerprint processing processing under underaadifferent different name name-- Rolando Rolando Afkas Jackson. Jackson. Defendant Defendant
7 had outstanding outstanding bench benchwarrants warrantsfor for his his arrest arrestfor for four cases.
8 28. Both Officer 28. Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad and and Officer OfficerMaurer Maurertestified testifiedthat that Defendant Defendant was was compliant compliant
9 with their directions. with directions.
10 29. Defendant testified that he testified that he was was returning returninghome homewith withhis wifeto hiswife toKaiser Kaiser from from the theNimitz Nimitz
iII t HillCemetery Hill Cemeterywhere where his his son son is is buried buried when he was pulled over. 12 30. Defendant 30. Defendant admitted admittedthat thathe hedid didnot nothave have aa driver's license, car driver's license, car registration, registration, or car car 13 msurance. insurance.
14 14 31. l. Defendant admitted that thathe hetold told Officer that he Maurer that Officer Maurer he might have an airsoft airsoft or pellet
15 15 gun in the car. Defendant testified that that he thought thought he he might have had had an an airsoft or
16 pellet gun pellet gun in in the vehicle because he remembered playing with vehicle because with one one at at his house house before before
17 to Nimitz Hill. going to
18 18 32. Defendant admitted that that Officer Maurer first Officer Maurer firstasked asked to to pat pat him him down down prior prior to to the the search search 19 19 of of the the vehicle. 20 20 33. Defendant Defendant admitted admitted that thathe he consented consentedtotoaa pat patdown down but but denied denied giving consent to aa giving consent
21 search of the search of the vehicle. vehicle.
22 34. Defendant testified that 34. that Officer Maurer did Officer Maurer did not not ask ask for' for consent to search the the vehicle. vehicle.
23 testified that Defendant testified that Officer OfficerMaurer Maurersearched searched the the car car on on her her own own and and told him not 24 lie to to lie to her her because because she she saw what was in in the the car. Defendant testified testified that that he told her her 25 that he he had had aasyringe syringe and and a pipe in the car.
26 26 35. Defendant testified that he he thought thoughtOfficer Officer Maurer was searching searching the the vehicle for three vehicle for three 27 five minutes to five minutes but was not not really sure. Defendant testified sure. Defendant testified that that it was a long time. 28 36. Defendant denied denied he hewas trying to wastrying to deceive deceive the the officers givinganother officers by giving another name. name.
People People v.v. Askers Askas Case No. No. CF0713-23 Decision Decision andand Order
Page 5 oflO of10 1 37. Defendant admitted that he uses other names than Rolando Jackson.
2 38. Defendant 38. Defendant testified testifiedthat thathe he does does go go by both Troy by both Troy Askas Askas and and Rolando Rolando Jackson. Jackson.
3 Defendant testified that the correct spelling is Afkas, not Askas, and that Askas was
4 spelled wrong by whoever was recording his name. s 5 When Defendant 39. When Defendantwas asked ififhe was asked he knew knew he he had had aa warrant warrant out out for his arrest, he responded
6 that he knew he had not been checking in for his cases.
7 DISCUSSION
8 The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution "protects against unreasonable searches
9 and seizures and is made applicable to Guam via section 142 l(b)(c) l(b)(c) of the Organic Act of Guam." Guam."
10 People v. Ch People v. Chargualaf, argualaf, 2001 Guam l1'H,r 14 2001 Guam 14 (internal (internal citations citations omitted). omitted). Brief Brief investigative investigative 11 detentions are permitted detentions are permitted under under the the Fourth Fourth Amendment Amendment "when aa police police officer officer has has reasonable reasonable 12 suspicion that an individual was engaged in or is about to be engaged in illegal conduct." People
13 1 v. Johnson, ,r (citing Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. Johnson, 1997 Guam 9114 U.S. 1 (1968)). "As aa general (1968)) "As general matter, matter, the 14 warrant is reasonable decision to stop an automobile without a warrant reasonable where the police police have probable probable
15 15 cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. Further, Further, itit is is reasonable reasonable to to stop stop aa car where 16 16 the police merely merely have aa reasonable reasonable suspicion suspicion to believe believe the the driver driver has has committed committed aa traffic traffic 17 17 violation." Chargualaf, ,r 17 Chargualaf, 2001 Guam l111 17 ((citations omitted). "In order to determine whether citations omitted). 18 18 an officer had reasonable suspicion sufficient sufficient to to warrant warrant aa traffic stop, the court must look at the 19 19 totality of the circumstances, taking into account the facts known to the the officers officers from from personal personal 20 20 Johnson, 1997 observation." Johnson, 1997Guam ,r (citation and quotation Guam99116 quotation marks marks omitted). omitted). Furthermore, Furthermore, 21 the reasonable reasonable suspicion suspicion must must exist exist at at the thetime timethe thestop stopwas wasinitiated. initiated.Id. Id (citation ( citation omitted).
22 Defendant acknowledges acknowledges that that the the stop stop itself itself was presumably reasonable reasonable but but sets forth that 23 any expansion expansion of of the stop was unreasonable and and that he did not give consent to search the vehicle. 24 generally, Mot. Suppress, See generally, Dec. 11, Suppress, Dec. ll, 2023. 2023. The TheGovernment Governmentopposes, opposes, arguing arguing that that the the stop stop in 25 25 Defendant's consent was voluntary made. See generally, its entirety was reasonable and Defendant's generally, Opp'n, 26 Dec. 22, 2023. 2023. As As the the basis basis for for the the effectuation effectuation of ofthe the traffic stop stop is not being disputed, the Court 27 first turns turns to to Defendant's argument that the expansion of the traffic stop stop was was unreasonable. See unreasonable. See 28 28 Mot. Mot. Suppress Suppress at 2-4. 2-4. Defendant sets forth Defendant sets forth that that "the issue issue contested contested is not not whether whether law law
People v. v. Askers Askas Case No. CF0713-23 Decision and Order
Page 66 oflO o fl 0 1 enforcement exceeded the enforcement exceeded fifteen-minute rule" the fifteen-minute but "whether law enforcement's rule" but actions were enforcement's actions
2 duringthe reasonable during reasonable timeneeded thetime investigateexpired neededtotoinvestigate tags."Id. expiredtags." at3.3. "[T]he Id at duration tolerable duration "[T]he tolerable
3 3 of police inquiries of police the traffic-stop inquiries in the context isisdetermined traffic-stop context bythe determinedby seizure's'mission'-to theseizure's address 'mission'-to address
4 the traffic violation the that warranted violation that the stop warranted the and attend stop and related safety attend to related concerns. Because safety concerns.
5 addressing the infraction addressing the the purpose infraction isis the of the purposeof stop, it may the stop, no longer may 'last no than is longer than necessary to is necessary
6 that purpose."' effectuate that Rodriguez v. purpose."' Rodriguez United States, v. United 348, 354 States, 575 U.S. 348, (2015) (internal citations 354(2015)
7 "Authorityfor omitted). "Authority theseizure forthe thus ends seizurethus when tasks ends when tied to tasks tied the traffic to the are-- or traffic infraction are
8 reasonably should reasonably havebeen- shouldhave completed."Id. been -completed." Id (citation omitted).
9 Beyond determining whether to issue Beyond issue a traffic ticket, an officer's includes mission includes officer's mission ordinary inquiries incident ordinary inquiries the traffic incidenttoto the stop. Typically such traffic stop. inquiries involve such inquiries 10 10 checking the driver's license, determining driver's license, whetherthere dete1miningwhether areoutstanding thereare warrants outstanding warrants 11 against the driver, against the driver, and and inspecting registration and automobile's registration inspecting the automobile's proof of and proof insurance. checksserve These checks insurance. These thesame servethe objective as sameobjective enforcementof asenforcement ofthe traffic code: thetraffic code: 12 12 ensuring that vehicles on the road are that vehicles safely and responsibly. are operated safely 113 Id. at at355 355 (internal (internal citations, marks and quotation marks citations, quotation alterationsomitted"). and alterations omitted"). 14 In this this case, case, Officer Officer Maurer Maurer testified she approached that she testified that the vehicle approached the the speak to the vehicle to speak 15 15 operator while Officer Officer Tithingrad was at his own Tithingrad was vehicle, presumably own vehicle, towrite presumablyto citation. Officer writeaacitation. Officer 16 16 Maurer testified testified that she went that she went to speakwith to speak theoperator withthe while Officer operatorwhile Tithingrad was Officer Tithingrad at his own was at 17 17 vehicle for for officer officersafety. safety. Officer OfficerMaurer initiallyasked Maurerinitially Defendantsimilar askedDefendant questions to similarquestions those to those 18 18 asked by Officer asked by Officer Tithingrad his name what his Tithingrad - what didn't have name was, why he didn't any identification, where have any 19 19 he was coming from, and and who was was in the passenger in the seat. The passenger seat. Courtfinds TheCourt that these findsthat questions these questions 20 were related to the the traffic During her stop. During traffic stop. Defendant, Officer her conversation with Defendant, Maurer noticed Officer Maurer 21 that he was that he was not not able able to make make eye eye contact and observed her and contact with her him to observed him with fidgeting with to be fidgeting 22 hands. Officer something, possibly a cigarette, in both hands. noticed that Defendant's eyes Maurer also noticed Officer Maurer 23 were red and his pupils pupils were were dilated, which to her indicated to which indicated that he may her that underthe may be under influence of theinfluence of 24 24 something. Officer OfficerMaurer Defendantififhe askedDefendant Maurerasked wasokay he was andDefendant okayand respondedthat Defendantresponded he was that he 25 25 tired. The just tired. TheCourt Courtdoes does not notfind findthat questions unreasonably these questions thatthese the traffic stop. unreasonably prolonged the 26 26 Officer OfficerMaurer Maurerthen then asked asked Defendant Defendant ififthere there was anything in was anything the vehicle in the that she vehiclethat should know she should 27 27 about, to which Defendant responded about, to respondedthat thatthere mightbe theremight anairsoft bean gunororaapellet airsoftgun gun. At pelletgun. this At this 28 28
People v. Askas v. Askers Case No. CF0713-23 cF0713-23 Decision and Order
Page 7 of IO of 10 1 point, Officer Maurer point, instructedDefendant Maurer instructed Defendant exitthe to toexit vehicle the officersafety. forforofficer vehicle "[I]t is well safety."[I]t
2 established that anofficer thatan effecting aa lawful officer effecting trafficstop lawfultraffic mayorder stopmay thedriver orderthe andthe driverand passengers thepassengers
3 out of aa vehicle." United States vehicle." United Williams, 419 F.3d 1029, States v. Williams, 1030 (9th Cir. 2005) 1029, 1030 (citation 2005) (citation
4 4 See also Pennsylvania omitted). See omitted). Mimms, 434 U.S. Pennsylvania v. Minims, 106,111 U.S. 106, (1977) ("We fn. 66 (1977) Ill fn. holdonly ("Wehold that only that
5 has been once a motor vehicle has lawfully detained been lawfully for a traffic detained for violation, the traffic violation, may the police officers may
6 order the ofthe the driver to get out of vehicle without the vehicle violatingthe without violating Fourth Amendment's theFourth proscription Amendment's proscription
7 of ofunreasonable searchesand unreasonable searches andseizures."); seizures."),Rodriguez, Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 575 U.S. at356 356("Traffic ("Traffic stops stops are especially are especially
8 fraught with fraught dangerto with danger police officers."). to police the Court Therefore, the officers."). Therefore, also does Court also that Officer does not find that
9 unreasonably prolonged Maurer unreasonably stopwhen prolonged the stop sheasked whenshe Defendanttotoexit askedDefendant thevehicle. exitthe vehicle. Defendant
10 10 complied with Officer Maurer's instructions Officer Maurer's and headed instructions and to the headedto rearof the rear the vehicle. of the Defendant vehicle. Defendant
II 11 testified that he then consented testified that to Officer consented to Maurer conducting Officer Maurer pat down search conducting aa pat of his search of person. his person.
12 12 After Officer After Maurerconducted OfficerMaurer conducted the down, she pat down, the pat asked Defendant she asked for consent Defendant for to search consent to the search the
13 13 vehicle, which she and both she which both Officer Tithingrad testified and Officer Defendant agreed to. testified Defendant 14 "In the "In absence of the absence warrant, the of aa warrant, police may the police conduct a search may lawfully conduct or seizure search or only if seizure only if
15 15 the warrant an exception to the requirementapplies. warrantrequirement consent is applies. Voluntary consent recognized exception to is a recognized
16 the warrant warrantrequirement." requirement." Cnargualaf Guam 1l ,i1]14 2001 Guam Chargualaf, 2001 omitted).Therefore, citationsomitted). (internalcitations 14(internal Therefore,
17 17 the Court must examine, based must examine, basedon onthe thetotality whether Defendant's consent circumstances, whether totality of the circumstances,
18 was voluntary. voluntary. See id. at ,i 25. The at 1[25. TheCourt factors:: followingfactors the following examines the Courtexamines 19 1) 1) whether andthe detained and whether the defendant was detained lengthof thelength timeof oftime of the questioning, 2) the questioning; 2) the defendant whether the defendant was threatenedor was threatened orintimidated bythe intimidatedby police, 3) whether the thepolice; 20 defendant relied on misrepresentations or on misrepresentations madeby or promises made by the police, 4) thepolice; 4) whether 21 21 the the defendant under an-est custody or under was in custody defendant was when the arrest when consentwas the consent given, 5) was given; 5) whether the defendant whether the defendant was was in in a public public or secluded secluded place, place; andand 6) whether the whether the 22 defendant objected to the the search. search. 23 23 Ill Id.(citation (citationomitted). omitted).The Government The theburden hasthe has Government proveby burdentotoprove preponderance of evidence byaapreponderance 24 whether Defendant's Defendant's consent consentwas voluntary.Id wasvoluntary. Id "[I]t "[I]tisisonly analyzingallallthe onlybybyanalyzing circumstances thecircumstances 25 25 of ofan an individual individual consent consent that it can be ascertainedwhether be ascertained infact whetherin was voluntary fact itit was or coerced." voluntary or coerced." 26 26 Sc/fmeckloth Schneckloth v.v. Bustamante, 233 (1973). Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218,233 (1973). 27
People People v.v. Askers Askas Case No. No. CF0713-23 Decision andand Order
Page 8 of10 10 1 OfficerMaurer Here, Officer Maurer requested requested to search the the vehicle after a traffic stop stop was effectuated. 2 The traffic traffic stop stop .was was effectuated effectuated in in public. The Court public. The Court does does find find that that Defendant was was still seized
3 during the course during the of the courseof the traffic traffic stop stop when when he he gave gave consent. OfficerMaurer consent. Officer Maurer ordered ordered Defendant Defendant 4 of the out of the vehicle vehicle after after Defendant Defendant disclosed disclosed that there there may may be airsoft or pellet gun be an airsoft gun in the the 5 vehicle. Officer OfficerMaurer Maureralso alsotestified testifiedthat thateven evenififDefendant Defendanthad hadnot notlater laterbeen been arrested arrested for other 6 6 she would things, she would not have have let let him drive drive away because because he hedid didnot nothave haveaavalid validdriver's driver's license nor
7 did the vehicle have have aa valid valid registration registration or or current current insurance. insurance. Thus, Defendant would not be free 8 away. However, to drive away. However,the theCourt Courtdoes does not not find find that that this this factor weighs weighs heavily heavily against against a finding 9 9 ofvoluntary of voluntary consent consent because because Defendant Defendant was not not placed placed in in handcuffs handcuffs nor nor was was Defendant Defendant under under 10 arrest when when consent consentwas wasgiven. There was given. There was no no testimony testimony indicating indicatingthat that Defendant Defendant was was threatened 11 intimidated by the or intimidated the officers officers nor northat that Defendant Defendant relied reliedon onany anymisrepresentations misrepresentations or or promises promises 12 12 made by made by the the officers. There was officers. There was no no testimony testimony that that either either Officer Maurer or Officer Tithingrad Officer Tithingrad
13 1 had their had their weapons weaponsdrawn. drawn. Both Officer Maurer and Officer Maurer and Officer Officer Tithingrad Tithingrad testified testifiedthat that Defendant Defendant 14 14 consent for his gave consent his vehicle vehicle to to be be searched. searched. Officer Officer Maurer Maurer further further testified testified that that she she told told 15 15 that he Defendant that he could withdraw withdraw his consent consent at at any any time time during during the the search search of of the the vehicle, and and 16 16 shealso that she askedDefendant alsoasked Defendantfor forconsent consenttotoopen openup upthe thewallet walletafter afterretrieving retrievingititfrom from the thevehicle. vehicle.
17 17 Although Defendant Although Defendant testified testified that that he did did not consent to the search of the vehicle, vehicle, the the Court Court notes 18 18 that he that he acknowledged that that he he goes by different different names names and and that that he he knew knew he might be in trouble
19 19 because he had because he beenchecking notbeen hadnot checking in in for for his his criminal criminal cases since his cases since his son son passed passedaway. away. Thus, in
20 the totality examining the totalityof ofthe thecircumstances, circumstances, the the Court Court finds finds that that Defendant's Defendant's consent consent to to the the search search 21 of his of his vehicle vehicle was was freely freely and and voluntarily voluntarily given givenand and denies denies Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motionto to Suppress. Suppress. 22 II// 23 II// 24 II// 25 25 II// 26 II// 21 27 II// 28 II//
Peoplev.v. Askers People Askas Case No. CF0713-23 Decision and Decision and Order
Page 9 oflO Page 10 1 CONCLUSION
2 foregoing reasons, For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby hereby DENIES Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motion to to Suppress. Suppress.
3 Parties shall Parties shall return return for for aa StatUs Status Hearing Hearing onFebruary February5, 5, 2024at10:30 AsDefendant 2024 10:30 a.m. As Defendantremains remains 4 an asserted status, in an status, the the Court hereby sets a Pre-Trial Pre-Trial Conference Conference for for February February13, 13,2024 at 2024 at
5 10:30 a.m. and 10:30 andJury Jury Selection Selectionand and Trial for February Trial for February20, 20,2024 2024 at at 1:30 p.m.
6 IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st ofJanuary, let day of January, 2024. 7 J
I .
10 HONORABLE VERNON::P. VEWONP. PEREZ PEREZ Judge, Judge, Superior Court of ofGuam Guam 11
133 1
14 14
15 15
17 17
18 18
19 19
24 24
25 25
People v. Askers People v. Askas CF0713-23 Case No. CFO'/13-23 Decision and Order
Page 10 10 oflO of10