People v. Ehlert, M.B.

Opinion

WLED sumvloa COURT EF QIJAH l ZBWDEC H PM in 2 CLaiR?§{ Ugly 3 "y= y 4

6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7

8 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRHVIINAL CASE no. CF0011-16 9 CRIM1NAL CASE NO. CF0081-17 vs. 10 DECISION AND ORDER MICHAEL BLAIR EHLERT, 12 Defendant. 13

14 INTRODUCTION 15 This matter is before the Honorable Vernon P. Perez on Defendant Michael Blair 16 Ehlert's ("Defendant") Motion for Reduction of Sentence, tiled September 23, 2019. Defendant 17 is represented by Attorney F. Randall Cunliffe, and the People of Guam ("the Government") are 18 represented by J. Basil O'Mallan III. Having reviewed the pleadings, the arguments presented, 19 and the record, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order DENYING Defendant's 20 Motion for Reduction of Sentence. 21 BACKGROUND 22 On July 31, 2017, a jury returned a verdict finding Defendant guilty of one count of 23 Attempted Third Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a Second Degree Felony) and one count 24 of Third Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a Second Degree Felony). Defendant was 25 sentenced to twenty four (24) months incarceration for each offense, to be imposed 26 consecutively to one another, for a total of forty-eight (48) months incarceration. (Judgment, 27 Nov. ll, 2017). Thirty (30) months of the sentence was suspended, and Defendant was to serve 28

People v. Elzlerl Case No. CF00l 1-16 & CF008l-17 Decision and Order

Page 1 of f 1 eighteen (18) months incarceration, with credit for time served. Id. Defendant subsequently

z appealed and the Supreme Court of Guam affirmed both convictions. See People v. Elbert,

3 2019 Guam 3. On June 24, 2019, Defendant began serving his sentence of eighteen (18)

4 months of incarceration, with credit for time served. (Commitment Order, Jun. 16, 2019). Prior

5 to commencing this term of incarceration, Defendant was permitted to leave island for work.

6 See Order After Hearing Granting Defendant's Request to Travel Off Island and Release of

7 Passport ("Order After Hearing"), Feb. 14, 2019.

8 On September 23, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion for Reduction of Sentence. On

g October 9, 2019, the Government filed its Opposition. No Reply was filed.

10 DISCUSSION

11 The reduction of a sentence after entry of judgment is governed by 8 G.C.A. § 120.46,

12 which provides as follows:

13 The court may correct an illegal sentence Ar any time and may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for the reduction of 14 sentence. The court may reduce a sentence within one hundred twenty (120) days 15 after the sentence is imposed, or within one hundred twenty (120) days after receipt by the court of a mandate issued upon affirmance of the judgment or 16 dismissal of the appeal, or within one hundled twenty (120) days after entry of 17 any order or judgment of the Supreme Court of Guam, having the effect of 18 upholding a judgment of conviction.

19 8 G.C.A. § 120.46. The trial court has the discretion "to decide if, on further reflection, the

20 original sentence now seems unduly harsh." United States v. Maynard, 485 F.2d 247, 248 (9th

21 Cir. 1973). It is essentially a plea for leniency. ld. See also United States v. Thayer, 857 F.2d

22 1358, 1360 (9th Cir. 1988) (a motion to reduce sentence is essentially a plea for leniency).

23 W hen considering a defendant's proffered request for leniency, the Court reviews the Motion

Z4 for the presentation of redemptive facts not available at the time of sentencing or for compelling

25 arguments, sufficiently persuasive for the Court to reconsider and reweigh the factors evaluated

26 at the defendant's initial sentencing hearing.

27 Defendant moves the Court to reduce his sentence because "the legislature has provided

28 the court the authority to do so." (Mot. at 2). Defendant argues that his sentence should be

People v. Elxlerl Case No. CFOOI 1-16 & cF008I-17 Decision and Order

Page 2 of 3 I reduced because he immediately returned to Guam upon the issuance of the Supreme Court of

2 Guam's Opinion and that he was under pre-trial house arrest for over two years. Id. The

3 Government opposes, arguing that there is no reason for the reduction of Defendant's imposed

4 sentence, and that the "48-month, 18 months to serve sentence is appropriate to incapacitate and

5 deter the Defendant from committing further crime." (Opp'n at 3). The Government further

6 argues that "[a]ny reduction of his sentence will revictimize the victims." Id.

7 The Court is not persuaded by Defendant's arguments that a reduction of sentence is

8 warranted in this matter. The Court acknowledges Defendant's immediate return to Guam after

9 his convictions were affirmed by the Supreme Court of Guam, however, such return was

10 ordered and expected. See Order After Hearing, Feb. 14, 2019. Without more, the Court, in its

discretion, denies Defendant's Motion.

12 CONCLUSION

13 For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby DENIES Defendantls Motion for Reduction

14 of Sentence.

15 IT IS SO ORDERED this day of December, 2019. 16

I 19

HONORABLE VERNON p. PEREZ 20 Judge, Superior Court of Guam 21

23 senvlcs we COURT BOX

24 IacknnwledQ° cho a copy of the original hlrE§qwas phcod In the coo . 25 ,Wu l. D11 M, I we, 26 _ v taacluu1§»== Ir 27 .Deputy =~» ! »»<~»~ "addGuam 28

People v. Elxlerr Case No. CF00l 1-16 & cF0081-17 Decision and Order

Page 3 off