tr* I § 5. 5: §-3
CLERK Q?
1 2025 f PM £
act 13
2025 OCT 4:4237
37
2 Pi; ew *"1,
f :.J5T L of } ="l= 5" 'r i ¢_.8 a.i'L_,;I\, i 5 3 i '\ I
OF
4
5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
6 )) CRIMINAL
CRIMINAL CASE
CASE no.
NO.CF0281-25-01
CF0281-25-01
7 PEOPLE OF OF GUAM,
GUAM, )) GPD Report GPD Report No.
No. 25-
25-10514
))
8 vs. )
) DECISION
DECISION & ORDER
9 )) RE. DEFENDANT'S
DEFENDANT'S MOTION
MOTION IN
) LIM/NE TO PRECLUDE LIMINE
10 10 RODNEY CRISOSTOMO CAMACHO, CAMACHO, INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION OF OF EVIDENCE EVIDENCE OF
DOB: 11/20/1976 DOB: 11/20/1976 ) DEFENDANT CAMACHO'S CAMACHO'S ARREST
ARREST
11 11 ) RECORD/RAP SHEET SHEET AND
AND BENCH
BENCH
)) WARRANT 12 12 Defendant. Defendant.
))
_______________ ))
13 1
14 14 This matter came before matter came before the
the Honorable
Honorable Alberto
Alberto E. Tolentino on
on July
July 15,
15, 2025,
2025, for a
15 15 Motion Motion Hearing.
Hearing. Defendant
Defendant Rodney Camacho
Camacho ("Defendant") was was present
present with
with counsel
counsel Public
16 16 Defender Renita Renita Taimanao-Munoz.
Taimanao-Munoz. Assistant Attorney Attorney General
General Samuel
Samuel Alexander
Alexander was
was present
present
17 17
18 18 for the the People People of
ofGuam
Guam ("People").
("People").The
Thecourt
courtscheduled
scheduled aa Motion
MotionHearing
Hearing totoaddress
address the
the
19 19 Defendant's Motion in Liming Limine to Preclude Introduction of Preclude Introduction of Evidence of ofDefendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's
20 20 Arrest Record/Rap Sheet and and Bench
Bench Warrant.
Warrant. Following
Following the
Record/Rap Sheet the hearing, hearing, the court
court took
took the
the matter
matter
21 under advisement pursuant under advisement pursuantotoSupreme SupremeCourt
Courtof
of Guam
Guam Administrative
Administrative Rule
Rule 06-001,
06-001, CVR
CVR
22 7.1(e)(6)(A) 7.l(e)(6)(A) and and CR1.1
CRl.1 of the
the Local
Local Rules
Rules of
ofthe
the Superior
Superior Court
Court of
ofGuam.
Guam. Having
Having duly
duly
23 23
24 24 considered the the parties' briefings, oral oral arguments,
arguments, and
and the applicable law, the the court
court now
now issues
issues
25 25 this Decision Decision and
and Order GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART the Defendant's 26 Motion in in Liming
Limine to
to Preclude Introductionof Preclude Introduction of Evidence Evidence of
of Defendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
Arrest
27 Record/Rap Sheet and Bench Warrant.
28
Decision Decision &
&Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's Motion in Limine Defendant's Motion Limine toPreclude Preclude Introduction
Introduction of Evidence
of of Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
Arrest Record/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet and Bench Warrant
People People v.
v. Camacho, CF0281-25-01
CF0281-25-01
Page Page 11 of7
BACKGROUND
I
2 occurring on or about Based on events occurring about April 24, 24, 2025,
2025, the
the Defendant
Defendant was charged with
3 CRI MI NAL MI CRIMINAL SCHI EF (As aa 3rd MISCHIEF 3rd De gre Fe Degree lony), RECKLESS
Felony); CONDUCT (As RECKLESS CONDUCT (As aa
4 4 . u .
Mlsdemeanor), andtwo Misdemeanor); and two charges chargesof
of ASSAULT
ASSAULT (As
(AsaaMlsdemeanor).
Misdemeanor). See
See IndIctment (May 2,
Indictment (May
5 2025). On May 13, 2025). 13, 2025, 2025, Defendant
Defendant Camacho
Camachofiled
filed his
his Motion
Motion for
for Discovery as well as
as his
his
6 7 Waiver Waiver of ofSpeedy
Speedy Trial. See Mot. Discovery (May 13, 13, 2025),
2025); see
see also Waiver
Waiver (May
(May 13,
13, 2025).
2025).
7
8 At At arraignment, this court arraignment, this court was was assigned to this
assigned to this matter.
matter. See
See Arraignment Hr'g Mims.
Arraignment Hr' Mins. at at
99 2:22:40PM 2:22:40PM(May (May23,
23, 2025).
2025).
10 10 On June 13, 2025,
June 13, 2025,the
thecourt
courtfiled
filed its
its Order
Order granting
grantinghis
hisMotion
Motion for Discovery.
Discovery. On
OnJune
June
11 18, 18, 2025, DefendantCamacho 2025, Defendant Camachofiled filedtwo
twomotions:
motions:Motion
Motion to
to Compel
Compel Discovery;
Discovery, and Motion in
12
1133 Liming Limine to Preclude Introduction of of Evidence of
ofDefendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
ArrestRecord/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet
14 14 and Bench Warrant and Bench Warrant ("Motion ("Motion in Liming").
Limine"). The People filed its its Response to the
Response to the Motion in in
15 15 Liming Limine on June 23, 2025.
2025. See
See Response
Response Liming
Limine (June 23,
23, 2025).
2025). And on
on June
June 30,
30, 2025,
2025, the
the
16 16 Defendant filed his Defendant filed his Reply Reply to the
the People's
People's Response.
Response. See
See Reply Limine
Limine (June 30, 2025).
(June 30, 2025). The
17
18 court subsequently scheduled this subsequently scheduled this matter matterfor
for a Motion
Motion Hearing
Hearingon
onJuly
July15,
15,2025
2025.
18
19 In accordance with his accordance with his Motion Motion in Limine, the Defendant argued the Defendant argued at
at the
the Motion
Motion Hearing
20 20 that the court that the court should should exclude
exclude evidence of his arrest ofhis arrest record
record and
and bench
bench warrant
warrant as
as inadmissible
inadmissible
21 hearsay. See Mot. hearsay. See Mot. Hr'g Hr'g Mims.
Mins. at
at 4:05:45
4:05:45 .-- 08:15PM (July - 08:15PM (July 15, 2025). In In response,
response, the
the People
22 22 stated that itit was unnecessary stated that unnecessary toto exclude exclude such
such evidence
evidence before
before trial just because the People because the
23 23
24 could potentially use use it wrongly. Id. at
at 4:09:00 - 09:43PM.
09:43PM. After
Afterhearing
hearingthe
the parties'
parties' arguments,
arguments,
24
25 25 the court took the matter under under advisement.
advisement.
26 26 \\ 27 27 \\ 28
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re. Defendant's Motion Motion in
in Limine
Limine to
to Preclude Introduction of of Evidence
of of Defendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
ArrestRecord/Rap
Record/RapSheet
Sheetand
and Bench
Bench Warrant
Warrant
People CF0281-25-01 People v. Camacho, CF0281-25-01 Page 22 of7
off
DISCUSSION
1
2 Under Guam GuamRule
Ruleof
of Evidence
Evidence ("GRE")
("GRE") Rule
Rule 801(c),
801(c), "'[h]earsay'
"'[h]earsay'isisa astatement, statement, other
other
3 than one than one made made by
by the
the declarant
declarantwhile
whiletestifying
testifying at
at the
the trial
trial or
or hearing,
hearing, offered
offered in evidence to
4 4 the truth prove the truth of the matter of the matter asserted."
asserted." Guam
Guam R.
R. Evid. 8()1(c).
801 c). ItIt isis noteworthy noteworthy that
that the
the Guam
Guam
5 Rules of of Evidence
Evidence are
are modeled after the Federal Federal Rules of Evidence. Therefore, Therefore, "interpretations "interpretations
6 6
7 of of the the Federal Federal Rules
Rules of
ofEvidence
Evidence from
fromother
otherjurisdictions
jurisdictions are
are persuasive
persuasive authority."
authority." People v.
v.
7
88 Jesus, 2009 2009 Guam ,r 32 n.8 (internal Guam2211 (internal citations omitted).
9 A. Without Withoutthe
theattached
attached Arrest
Arrest Record/RAP
Record/RAP Sheet,
Sheet, the
the court
court will
will not
notexclude
exclude such
such
10 10 evidence at trial evidence at trial at this time.
11 11 The Defendant seeks the the court's exclusion
exclusion of
ofhis
his arrest
arrest record
record as
as inadmissible
inadmissible hearsay.
hearsay.
12 12 Defendant Camacho Camacho argues that there are multiple hearsay that there hearsay statements statements in his arrest
arrest record that
that
13 13 require individual hearsay require individual hearsay exceptions exceptionsasasthey
they are
are statements
statementsrelating
relatingtoto "days
"days in which
which
14 14 CAMACHO CAMACHOwas wasarrested,
arrested, times
times CAMACHO
CAMACHOwas
wascriminally
criminallyconvicted,
convicted,sentences
sentences imposed
imposed on
15 15
16 16 CAMACHO, CAMACHO,and and various accusationsofofCAMACHO's various accusations CAMACHO's wrongdoing."
wrongdoing." Def.
Def.'s Mot. Liming
Limine at 2-3
17 17 (June 18, 2025).
(June 18, 2025). While While GRE
GRE 803
803 states
states many
many exceptions to the hearsay exceptions to rule, the hearsay rule, the following 18 18 exceptions are are relevant
relevant as
ascited
cited in
inthe
theDefendant's
Defendant'sMotion:
Motion:
19 19 (8) (8) Public
Publicrecords
recordsand
and reports.
reports. Records,
Records, reports,
reports, statements,
statements, or data compilations, 20 20 in any any form, ofofpublic
public offices
officesororagencies
agenciesororgovernment
governmentinstrumentality, instrumentality, setting
setting
forth (A)
(A) the
the activities of the office or agency or government instrumentality, or activities of the office or agency or government instrumentality, 21 21 (B) (B)matters
matters observed
observed pursuant
pursuant toto duty
duty imposed by law as as to which which matters
matters there
there
22 was a duty duty to report, excluding, however, in criminal cases matters in criminal cases matters observed by police officers
officers and
and other
other law enforcement personnel,or enforcement personnel, or(C)
(C) in civil
civil actions
actions and
and
23 proceedings and against the Government in criminal cases, factual findings proceedings and against the Government criminal cases, factual findings 24 resulting from
from anan investigation
investigationmade
made pursuant
pursuant to authority
authority granted by law, unlessunless the sources of information or other circumstances information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness.
of trustworthiness.
25 (22) Judgment
Judgment of of previous conviction. Evidence of ofaa final final judgment,
judgment, entered
entered after
after
26 a trial or
or upon a plea ofofguilty guilty(but
(butnotnotupon
uponaaplea
pleaof
ofpolo
nolocontenderen),
contendere), adjudging
27 27 a person guilty ofofaa crime crime punishable
punishable by death
death or imprisonment
imprisonment in in excess excess of
of one
one
year, to prove any year, any fact fact essential
essential to
to sustain
sustain the
the judgment, but not including, when 28 offered byby the the Government
Government in in aacriminal criminalprosecution
prosecution for
forpurposes
purposes other
other than
than
Decision Decision &
&Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's Motion in Defendant's Motion in Liming Limine to
to Preclude
Preclude Introduction of Evidence Introduction of Evidence
of of Defendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
Arrest Record/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet and Warrant
and Bench Warrant
People People v.
v. Camacho,
Camacho, CF028I-25-01
CF0281-25-0l
Page Page 3 of77
impeachment, judgments
judgments against
against persons other than the accused. The pendency accused. The pendency of
of
1 an appeal
appeal may
may be
beshown
shownbut
butdoes
doesnot
notaffect
affectadmissibility.
admissibility.
2 GRE 803 (8) & (22).
803 (8) (22). In
In his Motion
Motion in Liming,
Limine, the Defendant argues that neither of these hearsay 3
exceptions permits the exceptions permits the admission admission of
of the
the Defendant's R.AP
RAP Sheet/Arrest Record at trial.
Sheet/Arrest Record trial. See 4
5 Def.'s Mot. Liming Limine at
at 2-3. In
In its
its Response,
Response, the People
People stated that itit did not intend stated that to offer intend to
6 Defendant Camacho's arrest record to to prove the truth
arrest record truth of the the matter
matter asserted "unless of course asserted "unless course 7 further developments further developmentsinin the the evidentiary
evidentiary record
record implicate
implicatethat
thatitit would
would fall
fall into
into aa hearsay
hearsay
8 exception." Response Response Limine at
at 1.
1. The main
main purpose
purpose for offering
offering his
his arrest
arrest record as evidence 9
10 10 would be would be "to show show proof
proofofof
Calnacho's
Camacho'smotive,
motive,opportunity,
opportunity,intent,
intent,preparation,
preparation, plan,
plan,
11 knowledge, identity, or absence knowledge, identity, of mistake absence of mistake or
or accident."
accident." Id.
Id. at 1-2. However,
However, the
the Defendant
Defendant
12 12 also argued that that his
his arrest
arrest and
andprior
priorconvictions
convictions may
may not be used as propensity propensity evidence when
used as
13 13 those those prior convictions from approximately approximately thirty years ago do not prove any any material
material element
14 14 to the crimes crimes charged
charged in this
this case. SeeMot.
case. See Mot.Limine
Limine at
at 3.
15 15
16 16 Although Although the
the Defendant referenceshis Defendant references his RAP RAP Sheet/Arrest Record in Sheet/Arrest Record in the the Motion in
117 7 Liming Limine as as Exhibit
Exhibit A, no
no such
such exhibit
exhibit was
was attached to the
attached to the Motion in Liming Limine for the
the court's
court's
18 18 consideration. Withoutthe consideration. Without theability ability to
to review
review the full arrest
arrest record at issue, the court issue, the court will
will not
19 19 grant its exclusion at trial at this time.
time.
20 20
B. Defendant Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's bench
bench warrant for
for failure
failure to
to appear
appear does not make it more does not
21 or less probable
probable that he committed the the alleged
alleged crimes
crimes inin this
this case.
case.
22 22 In addition to the exclusion exclusion of
ofDefendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's arrest
arrest record,
record, he
he seeks
seeks the court to
23
24 exclude exclude evidence evidence of
of aabench
bench warrant
warrant issued
issued in
in another
another case:
case: CF0492-20.
CF0492-20. As
As authority,
authority,
25 Defendant Camacho states thatthis states that thiswarrant
warrantisisirrelevant;
irrelevant, and
andalternatively
alternatively states
states that
thatif
if relevant,
26 26 GRE 403 403 would
would bar
bar this
this evidence
evidence as
as its
its probative
probative value
value isis substantially
substantially outweighed by the outweighed by the
27 danger of unfair danger of prejudice.See unfair prejudice. SeeDef.
Def.'s
's Mot. Limine at
at 3-4.
3--4. Specifically,
Specifically, the
the Defendant
Defendant argues
argues
28
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's Motion in Defendant's Motion inLimine Limine to of Evidence to Preclude Introduction of Evidence of of Defendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
Arrest Record/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet and Bench Warrant
and Bench Warrant
People People v.
v. Camacho,
Camacho, CF0281-25-01
CF0281-25-01
Page Page4 4 of7
of 7
1 that this bench bench warrant for a failure failure to
to appear
appear does
does not
not prove
prove any
any material
material element
element to the charges
2 and has no similarity to to the
the conduct case. Id.
conduct alleged in this case. at 4.
Id at
.3 People do
Although the People do not not explicitly
explicitly argue
argue that
that this
this bench
bench warrant
warrant is relevant, the court 4
5 can reasonably infer that the the People
People deem it relevant based on its possible use use of the
the evidence as
5
66 of Camacho's "proof of Camacho's motive, motive, opportunity,
opportunity, intent,
intent, preparation,
preparation, plan,
plan, knowledge, identity, identity, or
77 absence of mistake or accident." Response Limine Liming 2.
8 admissibility of
Before reviewing the admissibility of the bench bench warrant
warrant under GRE
GRE 404(b),
404(b the court
court
9
10 10 must review whether it is relevant under GRE 401. Under GRE 401, evidence is is relevant
relevant if
if it
11 11 has "any tendency to make the the existence of any
existence of any fact
fact that is of consequence to the determination 12 12 . . . .
of the of the action action more probable or less probable than than it
it would
would be without the
the evidence."
evldence." Guam R.
13 13 401. The standard
Evid. 401. standard for determining determining whether
whether evidence
evidence is
is relevant
relevant is
is low; simply asking
low, simply asking
14 14
15 whether whether the evidence evidence has
has something
something to
to do
do with
with the
the claims
claims or
or defenses in the case.
15
16 In CF0492-20, the the Defendant pied
pled guilty to the following charges: POSSESSION OF A
17 17 SCHEDULE II CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE SUBSTANCE (As
(As aa 3rd Degree Felony); POSSESSION OF A 18 18 CONCEALED FIREARM (As a 3rd CONCEALED FIREARM 3rd Degree Degree Felony);
Felony); and POSSESSION OF A FIREARM POSSESSION OF FIREARM
19 19 WITHOUT WITHOUT AN ANIDENTIFICATION
IDENTIFICATIONCARD
CARD(As a 3rd
(As a 3rdDegree
Degree Felony).
Felony). See
See People
People v.
v. Camacho,
Camacho,
20
21 CF0492-20 (Judgment (June 16, 16, 2021)). The bench warrant warrant at issue was filed for his failure failure to
22 appear at a Progress appear at Hearing on January Progress Hearing January 17, 17, 2024.
2024. See
See People
People v.
v. Camacho,
Camacho, CF0492-20
23 23 (Progress Hr'g Mims. at 3:05:0SPM Mins. at 3:05:05PM (Jan.
(Jan. 17,
17, 2024)).
2024)). As
As mentioned
mentioned earlier, the Defendant was earlier, the
24 charged charged in this case with CRIMINAL case with CRIMINAL MISCHIEF MISCHIEF (As
(As aa3rd
3rd Degree
Degree Felony);
Felony); RECKLESS
25 26 CONDUCT (As aa Misdemeanor), Misdemeanor); and two charges charges of
of ASSAULT
ASSAULT (As
(As aa Misdemeanor).
Misdemeanor). See
26
27 27 Indictment Indictment (May 2, 2025).
28
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's Motion in Limine Defendant's Motion Limine to Preclude Preclude Introduction of Evidence of of Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
Arrest Record/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet and Bench Warrant
People v. Camacho, CF0281-25-01 People CF0281-25-0l Page Page 5 of7
Under Under GRE 401's
401 's low
lowstandard
standard of
of proof,
proof, the
the court
court finds
finds that
that the
the Defendant's
Defendant's 2024
2024
1
2 2 bench warrant warrant in
in a Controlled Substance and Firearm Substance and Firearm Possession Possession case
case does
does not
not make
make itit more or
3 less probable that the probable that the Defendant Defendant committed
committed the
the alleged conduct relating to the charges conduct relating charges in this this
4 4 2025 case. Even 2025 case. Even if this this evidence
evidence was
was relevant,
relevant, the
the court
court notes
notes that its admission would still be admission would
5 barred by GRE 402 402 and 404(b). GRE
GRE 402
402 states
states that:
that:
6
7 All All relevant
relevant evidence
evidence isis admissible, admissible, except
except as
as otherwise
otherwise provided
provided by the the
Constitution of the Constitution of the United United States,
States,by
bythe
theOrganic
OrganicAct
Act of Guam,
Guam, byby the
the laws
laws of
8 Guam, Guam, by these
these Rules or other
other rules prescribed by the Supreme Supreme Court of GuamGuam 9 pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.
admissible.
10 10 Guam R. Evid. 402.
Guam R. 402. In In this
this case,
case, the Defendant arguesthat Defendant argues 404(b) is GRE 404(b)
thatGRE is the
the other
other rule
rule of
11 II evidence that would prevent this this relevant
relevant evidence's
evidence's admissibility at at trial. GRE
GRE 404(b)
404(b) states
states the
12 12 following followingpurposes purposes where
where evidence
evidence of
ofother
othercrimes,
crimes, wrongs,
wrongs, or
oracts
acts are
are admissible
admissible at trial:
trial:
13
14 14 (b) Other
Other crimes,
crimes, wrongs,
wrongs, or
or acts.
acts. Evidence ofofother
other crimes,
crimes, wrongs,
wrongs, oror acts
acts is not
admissible admissible to to prove the character of a person character of person in order to show that show that he acted
acted in
15 15 conformity therewith.
therewith. ItIt may,
may, however,
however,be beadmissible
admissibleforforother
otherpurposes,
purposes, such
such as
as
proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, identity, or 16 absence absence of mistake
mistake or or accident,
accident, provided
provided that
that upon
upon request
request by the
the accused,
accused, the
17 prosecution in a criminal criminal case
case shall
shall provide
provide reasonable
reasonable notice
notice in advance
advance of of trial,
or during
during trial
trial if
if the
the court
court excuses
excuses pretrial notice on good cause pretrial notice cause shown, shown, of thethe
18 18 general nature nature of any such evidence evidence it intends to introduce at trial.
19 19 Guam Guam R. Evid.
Evid. 404(b). Under this
404(b Under this evidentiary evidentiary rule,
rule,"[
"[e]vidence
e]vidence of other
other crimes
crimes or acts
acts is
1s
20 admissible ... 'except admissible ... 'exceptwhere where itit tends
tends to
to prove
prove only
only criminal disposition," People criminal disposition,'" People v.v. Serbian, Sablan,
21 21 22 22 2023 ,r 68 2023 Guam 44 11 68 (quoting United States v. Ayers, States v. Ayers, 924 F.2d 1468, 1468, 1473
1473 (9th Cir. 1991)
1991)
23 23 (citation citation omitted))
omitted)).
24 24 Although the People stated Although that itit would be offering stated that offering evidence evidence of
ofthe
thearrest
arrest record
record under
under
25 25 GRE 404(b), 404(b the the People
People provided
provided no
no notice
notice of
ofthis
this intent
intent outside
outside of
of its
its Response.
Response. Therefore,
26 evidence evidence of of the
the Defendant's
Defendant's bench
bench warrant
warrant in
in CF0492-20
CF0492-20 would
would have
have been
been inadmissible
inadmissible
27
28 without reasonable notice under GRE 404(lb).
404(b ).
28
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re. Defendant's Motion Motion in
in Liming
Limine to Preclude Introduction of of Evidence
of of Defendant
Defendant Camacho's
Camacho's Arrest
ArrestRecord/Rap
Record/Rap Sheet
Sheet and
and Bench
Bench Warrant
People People v.
v. Camacho,
Camacho, CF0281-25-01
CF0281-25-0l
Page 6 of7
of 7
CONCLUSION
2 For reasons set forth above, the court hereby GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN
3 PART the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Preclude Introduction of Evidence of Defendant 4 Camacho's Arrest Record/Rap Sheet and Bench Warrant. Specifically, the court GRANTS the 5 exclusion of Defendant Camacho's Bench Warrant issued in CF0492-20 but DENIES the 6
7 exclusion of Defendant Camacho's Arrest Record/Rap Sheet.
8
9 A Pre-Trial Conference is scheduled before this court on November 12, 2025, at IO 9:00AM.
11
12 OCT 1.3 2025 SO ORDERED this - - ~ --------
13
14
15
16
17 HONORAl{LE NtbERTo~-E. TOLENTINO ,, ··"- ,,,.· •·· . " .
18 Judge, Superfof'G0.urt_9f Guam <I,_:
. ...
- .,..
• • __,, _
~ •
19
20
21
22
23
SERVICE V!A EMAIII.
24 I acknowledge that an electronic copy of the original was e-mailed to:
25
26
27 Datel~J3~ime: 4LUt R ·t indlau.
28
Decision & Order Re. Defendant's Motion in Limine to Preclude Introduction of Evidence of Defendant Camacho' s ArrestRecord/Rap Sheet and Bench Warrant People v. Camacho, CF0281-25-01 Page 7 of7