People v. Castro
Opinion
FEL;L
supER1o=2: COURT
Qpgg
1 2022 dUG I 1 PH 5=2L:
2 CLER UF C I
l T
3
C Xix E
4 'tnznmsn i
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, Criminal Case No. CF0274-22 8 GPD Report Nos. 22-04362 / 22-11153 / v. 22-11159 9 PATRICK MUNA CASTRO DECISION AND ORDER 10 (aka PAT), FINDING DEFENDANT NOT COMPETENT 11 DOB: 10/01/1975 TO STAND TRIAL AND ACCEPTING PLEA OF NOT GUILTY BY REASON 12 Defendant. OF MENTAL ILLNESS, DISEASE, OR DEFECT
13-
14 INTRODUCTION 15 This matter came before the Honorable Alberto C. Lamorena, III on June 23, 2022 for a
16 Competency Hearing. Assistant Attorney General Damaris Le represents the People, and Alternate
17 Public Defender Peter .Santos represents Patrick Muni Castro (aka Pat) ("Defendant"). Having
18 duly considered the Defendant's Forensic Evaluation, the parties' oral arguments, and the
19 applicable law, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order and f'lnds Defendant not
20 competent tb stand trial and accepts Defendant's plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Mental
21 Illness, Disease, or Defect.
22 BACKGROUND
23 On May 5, 2022, Defendant was indicted on Charge One: Aggravated Assault (as a 3 I'd
24 Degree Felony) withSpecial Allegationz.Possession or Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission
25 of Felony, Charge Two: Aggravated Assault(as a 3rd Degree Felony) with Special Allegation:
26 Possession or Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission of a Felony, Charge Three: Family
27 Violence (as a 3rd Degree Felony) with Special Allegation: Possession or Use of a Deadly Weapon
28 in the Commission of a Felony, Charge Four: Possession of a Firearm without a Firearm
Decision and Order Finding Defendant Not Competent to Stand Trial and Accepting Plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness, Disease, or Defect CF0274-22, People of Guam v. Patrick Mina Castro 1 Identification Card (as a wId Degree Felony) (Two Counts), and Charge Five: Possession of an
2 Unregistered Firearm (as a 3 I'd Degree Felony) (Two Counts). See Indictment (May 5, 2022).
3 Defendant allegedly attacked his ex-girlfriend Natasha Juliet, using a pickup truck to strike
4 Natasha's vehicle. Id. Defendant allegedly also had multiple unregistered firearms in his
5 possession at the time of his arrest.
6 On May 20, 2022, Defendant pled Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness, Disease, or
7 Defect. See Minute Entry (May 20, 2022). Pursuant to 9 G.C.A. §7.25, the Client Services and
8 Family Counseling Division of the Superior Court of Guam ("CSFC") arranged for Defendant to
9 undergo a forensic evaluation with a qualified psychologist. See Order for Forensic Evaluation
10 (May 23, 2022).
11 On June 10, 2022, Defendant underwent his forensic evaluation with Dr. Juan Rapadas, an
12 expert clinical psychologist at CSFC. See Forensic Evaluation at 2 (Jun. 15, 2022).
13 The Court held a hearing on June 23, 2022 to determine Defendant's competency to stand
14 trial and to review his plea. After hearing the arguments of the parties, the Court took the matter
15 under advisement. See Minute Entry (Jun. 23, 2022).
16 DISCUSSION
17 "A defendant is incompetent to be proceeded against in a criminal action if, as a result of
18 mental illness... he is unable (1) to understand the nature of the proceedings, (2) to assist and
19 cooperate with counsel, (3) to follow the evidence, or (4) to participate in his defense." See 9 20 G.C.A. § 7.8'7(21)(1)_(4).
21 Defendant appeared only somewhat grounded to reality throughout the ninety-minute 22 23 forensic evaluation. See Forensic Evaluation at 4 (Jun. 15, 2022). Defendant's speech flow and
24 quality were slowed but understandable. at 5. Defendant was able to properly organize his
25 thoughts, but his emotions did not match the mood and circumstances of his answers (i.e., laughing
26 when talking about sad topics and crying when talking about happy topics). at 5. Defendant also
21 had difficulty holding conversation, often appearing confused and lost while struggling to find
Decision and Order Finding Defendant Not Competent to Stand Trial and Accepting Plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness, Disease, or Defect CF0274-22,People of Guam v. Patrick Mina Castro 1 odds. Q at 3-4. Defendant was aware of his cognitive deficiencies, routinely displaying sorrow
2 and apologizing for his memory lapses and shortfalls. Q at 5. Defendant also struggled with both 3 . .
short and long-term memory. Q at 3-5. Defendant was unable to remember many important details 4 of his life, such as what decade he graduated high school or who his immediate family members 5 6 Vere. 1_cLat3.
7 It is noteworthy that Defendant was hit by a car five or six years ago. at 3. As a result of
8 'this accident, Defendant suffered a traumatic brain injury and experiences both memory and
9 concentration problems. at 4-5. Defendant is now at risk for developing early onset Alzheimer's 10 disease. at 4. Defendant has reported memory gaps and a "big emptiness" in his mind ever since 11 his accident. at 3.
12 Defendant also has a long history of using illegal drugs, having been diagnosed with both 13
14 Pnethamphetamines use disorder and cocaine use disorder. at 4. Defendant also habitually uses
15. marijuana as a self-medication following his car accident. at 4. 16 Defendant underwent a Montreal Cognitive Assessment ("MOCA") during his forensic 17 examination, which is a brief test used to gage the Defendant's current orientation, object 18 19 registration, attention, memory, and language recognition skills. Q at 5. Defendant only scored a
20 16/30 on the MOCA, which signals he "is clearly and overtly suffering from overall cognitive
21 ]weaknesses and/or memory issues." at 5.
22 Additionally, Defendant took an Inventory of Legal Knowledge ("ILK") Test, which gages 23 .. . . .
he Defendant's ablllty to understand legal mformatlon shared wlth them. at 6. It's clear that 24 defendant's understanding of criminal proceedings is deficient. Defendant's ILK score was similar 25 26 o that of someone randomly guessing each answer. at 6. However, Dr. Rapadas believes that
27 defendant was genuinely trying to answer the questions, and that Defendant's score reflects his
28 1signifieant neurocognitive disorder and brain injury. at 6. Defendant could not recall the name
Decision and Order Finding Defendant Not Competent to Stand Trial and Accepting Plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Illness, Disease, or Defect CF0274-22, People of Guam v. Patrick Mina Castro 1 of his judge, lawyer, or when his next hearing was. at 7. Defendant also struggled defining basic
2 legal concepts such as the role of a jury. at 7. It is not clear Defendant even understands the 3 . .
charges agalnst huh or why he was arrested. i at 7.
4 Taking all data in total, Defendant is currently not competent to be proceeded against or to 5 . 6 be sentenced. Defendant's low MOCA and ILK Test results all indicate he is struggling with major
7 cognitive weaknesses. It is clear that Defendant cannot rationally engage in conversation with his
8 attorney due to his difficulty holding conversation, serious memory problems, and an inability to
9 retain any legal advice provided to him. Therefore, Defendant cannot meaningfully participate in 10 building his legal defense strategy.
ll It is unlikely that Defendant will ever be restored to competency, as the accident was several 12 13 years ago and Defendant remains "very far from his normal baseline functioning before the
14 accident." at 8. Defendant's neurocognitive abilities will likely deteriorate if anything, given
15 Defendant's susceptibleness to premature Alzheimer's disease. at 8. Therefore, transfer to
16 Mental Health Court is appropriate so that Defendant can work on controlling his behavior with the
help of the Guam Behavioral Health and Wellness Center.
CONCLUSION
19 For the reasons started above, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions 20
21 oflawz
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Castro (People v. Castro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.