People v. Cluck

• Court: Superior Court of Guam
• Decided: May 13, 2026
• Docket: CM0345-25
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

... -

3 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 4 PEOPLE OF GUAM, 5 v. 6 7 ADAM RAY CLUCK, DECISION AND ORDER DOB: 05/18/1979 DENYING 8 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS Defendant. 9

10 INTRODUCTION

11 This matter came before the Honorable Alberto C. Lamorena, III on February 13, 2026 for

12 hearing on Adam Ray Cluck's ("Defendant's") Motion to Dismiss ("Motion"). Assistant Attorney

13 General Lucas Wood represents the People, and Attorney Le Roi Enriquez represents Defendant.

14· Having duly considered the parties' briefs, oral arguments, and the applicable law, the Court now

15 issues the following Decision and Order and DENIES Defendant's Motion.

16 BACKGROUND

17 Defendant is charged with Family Violence (as a Misdemeanor). See Amended Magistrate's

18 Complaint (Sep. 27, 2025). The charge stems from an alleged incident in which Defendant was

19 accused of punching his wife, Brook Amber Cluck ("Victim"). Id.

20 On October 6, 2025, Defendant filed his Motion to Dismiss. Defendant claims dismissal is

21 appropriate because he and Victim reached a civil compromise. See Motion at 2 (Oct. 6, 2025).

22 Victim filed a signed declaration with the Court that same day stating "any claim I have against the

23 Defendant in this case has been compromised" and "I received adequate satisfaction of my claim".

24 See Declaration of Civil Compromise of Victim (Oct. 6, 2025). Victim did not provide any further

25 details on what that satisfaction or compromise entailed. Id.

26 The Court held a hearing on February 13, 2026. After hearing the arguments of the parties,

27 the Court took the matter under advisement.

Decision & Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss CM0345-25, People of Guam v. Adm a Ray Cluck Page 1 of3 1 DISCUSSION

2 Guam law allows for a civil compromise of misdemeanors. Specifically, 8 G.C.A. § 80.90 3 states as follows:

4 (a) When the defendant has been charged with the commission of an offense which is not a felony for which the person injured by the act constituting the 5 offense has a remedy by a civil action, the offense may be compromised as 6 provided by this Section.

7 (b) If the person injured appears before, or files his declaration in, the court in which the criminal action is pending at any time before trial and 8 acknowledges that he has received satisfaction for the injury, the court may, on payment of the costs incurred, order the criminal action dismissed. 9

10 (c) A dismissal under this Section is a bar to another prosecution for the same offense. 11 8 G.C.A. § 80.90 is based on Cal. Pen. Code§§ 1377 & 1378. See Note at 8 G.C.A. § 80.90. 12 owever, Cal. Pen. Code § 1377 specifically excludes the civil compromise of an offense "when it 13 is committed ... by or upon any family or household member". See Cal. Pen. Code § 1377(e). 14 "Family or household members" include "adults or minors who are current or former spouses". See 15 9 G.C.A. § 30.l0(b)(l). 16 Civil compromises exist to encourage direct restitution to a victim and discourage "criminal 17 rosecution of cases which are in reality of a private rather than public nature". See People v. 18 tephen, 182 Cal.App.3d Supp. 14, 19-20 (1986). However, a family or household member 19 exception to civil compromises is necessary because an inherent power imbalance arises in criminal 20 cases involving family or household member victims. "Domestic violence . . . offenses almost 21 always involve victims, who because of their status or condition, or relationship to the defendant, 22 ay be unduly influenced to civilly compromise." See People v. Gokcek, 138 Cal.App.4th Supp. 8, 23 24 21 (2006). This power imbalance makes it exceptionally difficult to ensure the voluntariness of the 25 agreement and fully vindicate the injury to the public. See People v. Moulton, 131 Cal.App.3d 26 Supp. 10, 21-23 (1982) (when dismissing a charge due to civil compromise, "significant 27 consideration" should be given to "the circumstances" of the private settlement and whether the 28

Decision & Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss CM0345-25, People ofGuam v. Adm a Ray Cluck Page 2 of3 1 settlement agreement was "a completely voluntary one"). Therefore, courts cannot allow civil

2 compromises in criminal cases involving family or household member victims.

3 The Defendant and Victim cannot civilly compromise this case because they share a family

4 or household member relationship through their marriage. Therefore, dismissal of the action is 5 inappropriate under 8 G.C.A. § 80.90(b). 6 CONCLUSION

7 For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Defendant's Motion. This case cannot be

8 dismissed under 8 G.C.A. § 80.90(b) because Defendant and Victim share a family or household

9 member relationship to each other.

11 IT IS SO ORDERED this May 13, 2026.

13 14

15 HONORABLE ALBERTO C. LAMORENA, III Presiding Judge, Superior Court of Guam 16

20 21

26 27

Decision & Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss CM0345-25, People of Guam v. Adm a Ray Cluck Page 3 of3