People v. Denamarquez

Opinion

2 ~';'L ...

- 1-. i"'»

51upé£ .; FQUFET -"we H'

1 §T.`r~» Las.

0 ; \3Li.*~§;%i

2 QEZE SE? 19 P55 3: In 3 CLERK OF COURT

4

I 1.»*»¢.ua.-q.-.

5

6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7

8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0260-22 9 vs.

10 DECISION AND ORDER GREGORIO TRIO DENAMARQUEZ, JR.,

12 Defendant. 13

INTRODUCTION

14 This matter came before the Honorable Vernon P. Perez on June 20, 2023, for hearing on 15 Defendant GREGORIO TRIO DENAMARQUEZ, JR.'s ("Defendant") Motion for Discovery 16 Brady. Present were Assistant Attorney General Christine S. Tenorio on behalf of the People of 17 Guam ("the Government") and Defendant with counsel, William L. Gavras. Having reviewed 18 the pleadings, the arguments presented, and the record, the Court now issues the following 19 Decision and Order.

20 BACKGR OU ND

21 On May 2, 2023, a grand jury indicted Defendant with five counts of Second Degree 22 Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a First Degree Felony). (Indictment, May 2, 2023). These charges 23 stem from allegations that Defendant touched a young female minor known to him on the buttock, 24 inner thigh, and primary genital area over the course of several years. (Decl. of Jeremiah Luther, 25 Magistrate's Con pl., Apr. 22, 2022).

26.

On May 8, 2023, Defendant filed the instant Motion. On June 6, 2023, the Government 27 filed its Opposition. On June 13, 2023, Defendant filed his Reply.

28

People v. De namarqz/ez Case No. CF0260-22 Decision and Order 1 On June 20, 2023, the Court heard brief arguments on the Motion and subsequently placed 2 the matter under advisement. 3 DISCUSSION 4 Defendant moves the Court to compel the Government to tum over "facts (including 5 statements) the A.G. uncovered and obtained in its prosecution of Gregorio Denamarquez, Sr." 6 (Mot. Compel at 2). Defendant sets forth that the "prosecution of Denamarquez, Sr. is Brady 7 material as the [alleged victim's] sister is integral to the [bringing] of these charges in that her 8 talk with the [alleged victim] led to these charges being brought. The specifics contained within 9 the A.G.'s file are equally valuable to Defendant and constitute Brady material as they necessarily 10 explain some of the underlying facts leading to the instant prosecution of Defendant." Id. at 3. 11 In its Opposition, the Government indicates that Defendant's father, Gregorio Denamarquez, Sr., 12 has not been charged by the Office of the Attorney General of Guam and that it was unaware of 13 an investigation concerning him until the Motion was filed. (Opp'n at 2). The Government now 14 has in its possession a police report concerning Defendant's father regarding allegations made by 15 the victim's older sister, S.D.J. (DOB: 10/07/2002). Id. According to the Government, "officers 16 of the Guam Police Department have confirmed that there is an open investigation against 17 Denamarquez Sr. and [he] has not been arrested yet." Id. The Government opposes turning over 18 the police report because (1) it is confidential as part of an open investigation and (2) it does not 19 constitute exculpatory evidence or Brady material. Id. at 2-5. Under Guam law, police reports 20 "are confidential and exempt from public inspection except as ordered by a court." 10 G.C.A. § 21 77129. 22 As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that "[t]here is no general constitutional right to 23 discovery in a criminal case." People v. Orallo, 2004 Guam 51]9 (quoting Weatherford v. Bursey, 24 429 U.S. 545, 559 (1977)) (alteration in original). "[T]he right to pre-trial discovery is strictly 25 limited to that which is pennitted by statute or court rule mandated by constitutional guarantees." 26 Id. (quoting Cole v. State, 835 A.2d 600, 608 (Md. 2003)). Guam law provides that upon a 27 defenda nt's noticed motion, the cour t must or der the pr osecutor .to disclose infor ma tion 28 enumerated under 8 G.C.A. § 70.10 that is "within his possession or control, the existence of

People v. Denamarquez Case No. CF0260-22 Decision and Order 1 which is known, or by the exercise of due diligence may become known to the prosecuting 2 attorney." 8 G.C.A. § 70.10(a). "The disclosure of exculpatory evidence is required by section 3 70.10(a)(7) which codifies and expands upon the constitutional due process requirement, set forth 4 in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), that the prosecution must disclose evidence favorable 5 to the defendant which is material to guilt or punishment." Orallo, 2004 Guam 5 11 12. Brady 6 evidence "includes impeachment evidence relating to government witnesses." People v. Fisher, 7 2001 Guam 2 11 12 (citing United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 676 (1985)). "In addition to 8 these mandatory disclosures, the court may order, in its discretion, that the prosecution turn over 9 other evidence upon a showing of materiality to the preparation of his defense and that the request 10 is reasonable." People v. Mateo, 2017 Guam 22 11 15 (quoting 8 G.C.A. § 70.15(a)). "[U]nder 11 both sections 70.10 and 70.15, as well as our holding in Tuncap, a threshold showing of 12 materiality must be established before the prosecution is obligated to tum over evidence to the 13 defendant either automatically (under section 70.10 and Brady) or following a motion by the 14 defendant (under section 70.15)." Id. 15 As there is no charged criminal case against Defendant's father, Denamarquez, Sr., the 16 only issue before the Court at this time is whether the police report must be horned over as 17 discovery to Defendant. The Government indicates that it has "reviewed the police report and 18 [has] confirmed that the victim in the Denamarquez Jr. case and Denamarquez, Jr. are not 19 mentioned anywhere in the report." (Opp'n at 2). The Court is inclined to agree with the 20 Government that "[t]he requested information - any statements given [by] the Victim's sister to 21 the Guam Police Department regarding an individual that [is] neither a defendant in the instant 22 case nor a witness - does not negate the guilt of Defendant." Id. at 4. The Court will not order 23 the Government to turn over the police report regarding Defendant's father, Denamarquez, Sr. 24 Defendant can cross-examine both the alleged victim and her older sister at trial as to how the 25 charges against Defendant in the instant matter were brought.

26 // 27 // 28 //

People v. Denamarquez Case No. CF0260-22 Decision and Order

Page 3 of f

1 CONCLUSION 2 For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby DENIES Defendant's Motion for Discovery. 3 A Status Hearing is set for October 3, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. Parties should be prepared to discuss 4 trial dates at that time.

5 IqbaL\

IT IS SO ORDERED this day of September, 2023 .

6

7 ,J

8

9 HONORABLE VERNON p. PEREZ Judge, Superior Court of Guam 10

11 12 13

14 15

16 17 in 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

People v. Den amarquez Case No. CF0260-22 Decision and Order