l §§L5 *.'li.E& :K OFF ;8§*;": I 2 2025 MAY 2323AM ZQ25%%&Y AH10: I{3=58 58 3 w:) §GR C~*;§3. i;\¢r 4 G? GL 5
6 6 [N IN THE THE SUPERIOR SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF GUAM 7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE CASE NO. no. CM0042-20 CM0042-20 9
vs. 10 DECISION AND ORDER 11 WILLIAM PAUL MAKA, 12 12
Defendant. 13
14 INTRODUCTION RODUC TI 15 15 This matter is before the Honorable Honorable Vernon Vernon P. P. Perez Perez on onDefendant DefendantWilliam William Paul Paul Maka's 16 16 ("Defendant") Motion ("Defendant") Motionto to Dismiss Dismiss Based on De De Minimis Statute ("Moton Minims Statute ("Moton to to Dismiss"), Dismiss"), filed filed April April 17 17 2025. Defendant 25, 2025. Defendant is represented by Assistant Public Defender Jocelyn M. M. Roden. Roden. The People 18 of Guam Guam ("the ("the Government") Government") are are represented represented by Assistant Assistant Attorney Attorney General General Dante Dante CH CH ,19 Harootunian. Having Having reviewed reviewedthe the pleadings, pleadings,the thearguments argumentspresented, presented, and and the the record, record, the Court 20 20 now issues the following Decision and Order. 21 BACKGROUND 22 Defendant is charged with one count of Family Violence (As aa Misdemeanor) Misdemeanor) and one 23 count of Assault (As (As aa Misdemeanor). Misdemeanor). (Magistrate's (Magistrate's Con pl., Jan. 23, 2020). Compl., 2020). These charges stem 24 from allegations allegations that that Defendant Defendant was yelling, yelling, throwing throwing pots pots and pans, and when his uncle, Andrew 25 H. Pangelinan, walked away to avoid argument, Defendant struck struck his his face causing his nose to 26 bleed. (Decl. (Deel. of Brendlynn O. ofBrendlynn 0. Joseph, Joseph, Magistrate's Con Compl., Jan. 23, 23, 2020). 2020). Officers responding 27
People v. Maker People v. Maka Case No. CM0042-20 Case No. CM0042-20 Decision Decision and and Order
Page Page l1 of of5 1 to the scene observed swelling, redness, redness, and a bump bump on on the the left left side side of of Mr. MI. Pangelinan's Pangelinan's face, as
2 well as redness to the area around around his his nose nose with with suspected suspected dried dried blood bloodon onthe thenostril nostrilarea. area. Id. Id
3 On August 6, 2021, 2021, Defendant Defendant filed filed aa Motion Motion for for Civil Civil Compromise. Compromise. The Court denied
4 the Motion, finding the Motion, finding that "civil "civil compromise compromise of family family violence violence matters matters does does not not present present 5 'circumstances such that 'circumstances such that through through private private settlement settlementthe thepublic publicisisfully fullyvindicated."' vindicated."' (Dec. &
6 Order at 3, 3, Oct. Oct. 15, 15, 2021). 2021). The The case case did did not not proceed proceed to to trial, however, as Defendant became the 7 subject et of of two Bench Bench Warrants. See See Bench BenchWarrant, Warrant, Dec. Dec. 7, 7, 2021 2021 (ROW (ROW Service Service 09/21/2022) & 8 Bench Warrant, Feb. 13, 2023 (ROW Service 04/14/2025).
9 Jury Selection and Trial is currently set set for for August 13, 13, 2025. . See See Second Am. Criminal
10 Trial Scheduling Scheduling Order, Order, Apr. 22, 2025. 11 On April 24, 2025, 2025, Defendant Defendant filed filed the the instant instant Motion. Motion. On May 7, 7, 2025, the Government 12 filed its Opposition. filed its Opposition. No No Reply Reply was was filed. filed. The TheCourt Courtsubsequently subsequently placed placed the the matter matter under under 13 advisement on the advisement on the briefs. briefs. See See CRl.1 CRl.l Form Form 3, May 19, 2025. '14 DISCUSSION 15 Under Guam law:
16 16 The court shall dismiss a prosecution if, having regard to the nature of the conduct charged to constitute an offense and the nature ofof the the attendant attendant circumstances, circumstances, it 17 17 finds that the defendant's conduct: 18 18 (a) Was within aa customary customary license license or or tolerance, tolerance, neither expressly 19 19 negated by the person whose interest was infringed nor inconsistent 20 with the purpose of the law defining the offense; offense, 20
21 (b) Did not actually cause or threaten the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law defining defining the the offense offense or or did so only to an extent 22 too trivial to warrant the condemnation of conviction; or 23 (c) c) Presents Presents such other extenuations that it cannot reasonably extenuations that reasonably be 24 regarded as as envisaged by the Legislature in forbidding the offense. The court court shall not not dismiss dismiss aa prosecution prosecution under under this this Subsection Subsection 25 25 without filing aa written statement ofof its reasons. 26 26 99 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7.67. 7.67. Section Section 7.67 7.67 "directs "directs the the trial trial court court to to dismiss dismiss aa prosecution prosecution if ifit finds finds that that the the 27 defendant's conduct falls within at least one of of three distinct circumstances." People v. Perez, 28
People Peoplev.v. Maker Maka Case No. No. CM0042-20 Decision Decision and and Order
Page 22 ofS off 1 2004 Guam 44 ,r119 (emphasisininoriginal). 9 ( emphasis original). The The "statute "statute recognizes that it would would be unrealistic to 2 believe that judges never that judges never enter enter aa finding finding of of not guilty guilty even even though though guilt is proven proven where where aa 3 conviction conviction is is considered considered to to be beinappropriate, inappropriate, and and therefore authorizes the trial authorizes the trial court court to to mitigate
4 the general provisions the general provisions of the criminal law to prevent absurd applications." Id absurd applications." ,r (quoting 9 Id atat1110 5 G.C.A. G.C.A.§§7.67 7.67commentary). commentary).Defendant Defendantargues arguesthat thatthis thismatter mattershould shouldbe be dismissed dismissedpursuant to 9 pursuant to 9 6 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7.67(b). 7.67(b). See See generally, Mot. Dismiss. Dismiss. 7 Section 7.67 Section is modeled 7.67 is modeled after after Model Model Penal Penal Code Code§§2.2.12, 12, which which has been adopted has been adoptedby by New New
8 Jersey, Maine, Jersey, Maine, Hawaii, and and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania. Id Id at ,r 11; at 11 ll, fn. fn. 3. In InPeople Peoplev.v. Perez, Perez, the the Supreme 9 Court of of Guam looked to case law from Guam looked from New NewJersey Jersey for for guidance guidance in in evaluating evaluating aa motion motion to dismiss 10 10 pursuant pursuant toto99G.C.A. G.C.A.§§7.67, citing citingState State v. Zarrilli, 523 A.2d 284 284 (N.J. (NJ. Super. Ct.Law Super. Ct. Law Div. Div. 1987),
11 aff'a', aff'd, 532 A.2d 1131 Super.Ct. 1131 (N.J. Super. Ct.App. App. Div. Div. 1987). 1987). Id. at ,r 11.ll. The at 11 The Zarrilli Zarrilli court court stated that 12 "[t]he "[t]heone one question question to to be asked andanswered asked and answeredininresponse responsetotoa adedeminimis minimsmotion motionisis... ... What is
13 13 the risk the risk of of harm harmto towhich whichsociety societyisisexposed exposedby bydefendant's defendant'sconduct?" conduct?" The Zarrilli court then set
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
l §§L5 *.'li.E& :K OFF ;8§*;": I 2 2025 MAY 2323AM ZQ25%%&Y AH10: I{3=58 58 3 w:) §GR C~*;§3. i;\¢r 4 G? GL 5
6 6 [N IN THE THE SUPERIOR SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF GUAM 7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE CASE NO. no. CM0042-20 CM0042-20 9
vs. 10 DECISION AND ORDER 11 WILLIAM PAUL MAKA, 12 12
Defendant. 13
14 INTRODUCTION RODUC TI 15 15 This matter is before the Honorable Honorable Vernon Vernon P. P. Perez Perez on onDefendant DefendantWilliam William Paul Paul Maka's 16 16 ("Defendant") Motion ("Defendant") Motionto to Dismiss Dismiss Based on De De Minimis Statute ("Moton Minims Statute ("Moton to to Dismiss"), Dismiss"), filed filed April April 17 17 2025. Defendant 25, 2025. Defendant is represented by Assistant Public Defender Jocelyn M. M. Roden. Roden. The People 18 of Guam Guam ("the ("the Government") Government") are are represented represented by Assistant Assistant Attorney Attorney General General Dante Dante CH CH ,19 Harootunian. Having Having reviewed reviewedthe the pleadings, pleadings,the thearguments argumentspresented, presented, and and the the record, record, the Court 20 20 now issues the following Decision and Order. 21 BACKGROUND 22 Defendant is charged with one count of Family Violence (As aa Misdemeanor) Misdemeanor) and one 23 count of Assault (As (As aa Misdemeanor). Misdemeanor). (Magistrate's (Magistrate's Con pl., Jan. 23, 2020). Compl., 2020). These charges stem 24 from allegations allegations that that Defendant Defendant was yelling, yelling, throwing throwing pots pots and pans, and when his uncle, Andrew 25 H. Pangelinan, walked away to avoid argument, Defendant struck struck his his face causing his nose to 26 bleed. (Decl. (Deel. of Brendlynn O. ofBrendlynn 0. Joseph, Joseph, Magistrate's Con Compl., Jan. 23, 23, 2020). 2020). Officers responding 27
People v. Maker People v. Maka Case No. CM0042-20 Case No. CM0042-20 Decision Decision and and Order
Page Page l1 of of5 1 to the scene observed swelling, redness, redness, and a bump bump on on the the left left side side of of Mr. MI. Pangelinan's Pangelinan's face, as
2 well as redness to the area around around his his nose nose with with suspected suspected dried dried blood bloodon onthe thenostril nostrilarea. area. Id. Id
3 On August 6, 2021, 2021, Defendant Defendant filed filed aa Motion Motion for for Civil Civil Compromise. Compromise. The Court denied
4 the Motion, finding the Motion, finding that "civil "civil compromise compromise of family family violence violence matters matters does does not not present present 5 'circumstances such that 'circumstances such that through through private private settlement settlementthe thepublic publicisisfully fullyvindicated."' vindicated."' (Dec. &
6 Order at 3, 3, Oct. Oct. 15, 15, 2021). 2021). The The case case did did not not proceed proceed to to trial, however, as Defendant became the 7 subject et of of two Bench Bench Warrants. See See Bench BenchWarrant, Warrant, Dec. Dec. 7, 7, 2021 2021 (ROW (ROW Service Service 09/21/2022) & 8 Bench Warrant, Feb. 13, 2023 (ROW Service 04/14/2025).
9 Jury Selection and Trial is currently set set for for August 13, 13, 2025. . See See Second Am. Criminal
10 Trial Scheduling Scheduling Order, Order, Apr. 22, 2025. 11 On April 24, 2025, 2025, Defendant Defendant filed filed the the instant instant Motion. Motion. On May 7, 7, 2025, the Government 12 filed its Opposition. filed its Opposition. No No Reply Reply was was filed. filed. The TheCourt Courtsubsequently subsequently placed placed the the matter matter under under 13 advisement on the advisement on the briefs. briefs. See See CRl.1 CRl.l Form Form 3, May 19, 2025. '14 DISCUSSION 15 Under Guam law:
16 16 The court shall dismiss a prosecution if, having regard to the nature of the conduct charged to constitute an offense and the nature ofof the the attendant attendant circumstances, circumstances, it 17 17 finds that the defendant's conduct: 18 18 (a) Was within aa customary customary license license or or tolerance, tolerance, neither expressly 19 19 negated by the person whose interest was infringed nor inconsistent 20 with the purpose of the law defining the offense; offense, 20
21 (b) Did not actually cause or threaten the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law defining defining the the offense offense or or did so only to an extent 22 too trivial to warrant the condemnation of conviction; or 23 (c) c) Presents Presents such other extenuations that it cannot reasonably extenuations that reasonably be 24 regarded as as envisaged by the Legislature in forbidding the offense. The court court shall not not dismiss dismiss aa prosecution prosecution under under this this Subsection Subsection 25 25 without filing aa written statement ofof its reasons. 26 26 99 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7.67. 7.67. Section Section 7.67 7.67 "directs "directs the the trial trial court court to to dismiss dismiss aa prosecution prosecution if ifit finds finds that that the the 27 defendant's conduct falls within at least one of of three distinct circumstances." People v. Perez, 28
People Peoplev.v. Maker Maka Case No. No. CM0042-20 Decision Decision and and Order
Page 22 ofS off 1 2004 Guam 44 ,r119 (emphasisininoriginal). 9 ( emphasis original). The The "statute "statute recognizes that it would would be unrealistic to 2 believe that judges never that judges never enter enter aa finding finding of of not guilty guilty even even though though guilt is proven proven where where aa 3 conviction conviction is is considered considered to to be beinappropriate, inappropriate, and and therefore authorizes the trial authorizes the trial court court to to mitigate
4 the general provisions the general provisions of the criminal law to prevent absurd applications." Id absurd applications." ,r (quoting 9 Id atat1110 5 G.C.A. G.C.A.§§7.67 7.67commentary). commentary).Defendant Defendantargues arguesthat thatthis thismatter mattershould shouldbe be dismissed dismissedpursuant to 9 pursuant to 9 6 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7.67(b). 7.67(b). See See generally, Mot. Dismiss. Dismiss. 7 Section 7.67 Section is modeled 7.67 is modeled after after Model Model Penal Penal Code Code§§2.2.12, 12, which which has been adopted has been adoptedby by New New
8 Jersey, Maine, Jersey, Maine, Hawaii, and and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania. Id Id at ,r 11; at 11 ll, fn. fn. 3. In InPeople Peoplev.v. Perez, Perez, the the Supreme 9 Court of of Guam looked to case law from Guam looked from New NewJersey Jersey for for guidance guidance in in evaluating evaluating aa motion motion to dismiss 10 10 pursuant pursuant toto99G.C.A. G.C.A.§§7.67, citing citingState State v. Zarrilli, 523 A.2d 284 284 (N.J. (NJ. Super. Ct.Law Super. Ct. Law Div. Div. 1987),
11 aff'a', aff'd, 532 A.2d 1131 Super.Ct. 1131 (N.J. Super. Ct.App. App. Div. Div. 1987). 1987). Id. at ,r 11.ll. The at 11 The Zarrilli Zarrilli court court stated that 12 "[t]he "[t]heone one question question to to be asked andanswered asked and answeredininresponse responsetotoa adedeminimis minimsmotion motionisis... ... What is
13 13 the risk the risk of of harm harmto towhich whichsociety societyisisexposed exposedby bydefendant's defendant'sconduct?" conduct?" The Zarrilli court then set
14 forth five five factors factors relevant relevantininevaluating evaluatingthis thisquestion: question: (1) (1)the thecircumstances circumstances surrounding surrounding the the 15 15 commission commission of ofthe the offense, offense; (2) (2)the theexistence existenceof ofcontraband, contraband; (3) (3)the theamount amount and and value of property 16 16 involved, (4)the involved; (4) the use use or or threat of violence, threat of violence; and and (5) (5) the the use use of weapons. Zarrilli, 523 A.2d A.2d at at 288. 17 17 For For purposes purposes of this motion, the Court assumes astrue assumes as the all the the factual factual allegations allegations against against 18 18 Defendant. Defendant. See See Perez, 2004Guam ,r 16 ((quoting Guam 41116 quoting Zarrilli, 523 A.2d A.2d at 286) ("it ("itmust must be be assumed assumed 19 19 that the that the conduct conductcharged chargedactually actuallyoccurred' occurred'because because'[t]he '[t]he motion motion does does not not provide provide a setting setting for
20 20 a determination determinationof ofguilt guiltor orinnocence."'). innocence."'). The TheDeclaration Declarationattached attached to to the Magistrate's Complaint 21 sets forth forth the thefollowing: following:
22 On or or about about January 21, 2020 January 21, 2020 at at or about about 6:15 6:15 p.m., p.m., GPD Officers Officers responded responded toto aa complaint complaintatatresidence residenceininDededo. Dededo.Arrival Arrival at that thatlocation, location,Officer Officer 23 Oliva Oliva met met with with Andrew Hansek Pangelinan Pangelinan (Victim, (Victim,"Mr. "Mr. Pangelinan"), who 24 reported that earlier earlier at at or or about about 55:35 :35 p.m., p.rn., same same date date at at his residence, residence, his nephew 25 WILLIAM PAUL WILLIAM PAULMAKAMAKA("Defendant") ("Defendant") started yelling and started yelling and throwing pots pots and and pans. pans. Mr. Mr. Pangelinan Pangelinan explained explained that that he he walked walked away away avoiding avoidingargument argument and and the 26 26 Defendant struck his face and his nose causing causing nosebleed. 27
People People v.v. Maker Maka Case No. CM0042-20 Case No. CM0042-20 Decision Decision andand Order
Page Page 3 of5 Officer Officer Oliver conducted injury Oliva conducted injury check check of of Mr. Mr. Pangelinan Pangelinan and and noted noted swelling, swelling, 1 redness, and bump on on the left of his face and redness to his nose area with dry left side of 2 2 blood on suspected blood on the the nostril nostril area. 3 3 The Defendant stated that he did assault his uncle. Defendant stated 4 (Decl. (Deel. of of Brendlynn Brendlynn O. 0. Joseph, Joseph, Magistrate's Magistrate's Con pl., Jan. Compl., Jan. 23, 23, 2020). 2020). Although Although there there is no 5 5 allegation of the existence of of contraband during this incident or the use of weapons and there is 6 6 no allegation of property property damage, the Court is concerned about the use or threat of of violence: 7 7 Defendant allegedly struck the victim's face face and nose causing causing swelling, redness and a bump to 8 8 the the side side of the victim's face nosebleed. The face and a nosebleed. The fact fact that that the the victim victim did did not not want want medical medical 9 9 treatment after treatment the incident after the incident isis not not dispositive dispositiveon on its its own. As the own. As the Government Government sets sets forth forth in its its 10 Io Opposition, "the Opposition, "the punches punches did did draw draw blood blood and any closed fist blow to the head head creates creates some 11 inherent risk risk of of serious serious injury." at 3). These injury." (Opp'n at These facts facts set set forth forth what the law seeks seeks to be 12 12 prevented- prevented bodily injury - bodily injury to a family or household household member. Defendant Defendantindicates indicates that that both he and 13 13 the conflicting statements the alleged victim gave conflicting statements (each (each claiming claiming the other struck him) and and that that 14 14 because because it is is unclear unclear who who the initial aggressor aggressor was, was, there there isis no no harm harm to to which society society may be 15 15 exposed. (Mot. Dismiss (Mot. Dismiss at 3). 3). The Court Court notes, notes, however, however, that that the facts set forth the facts forth in the the 16 16 Complaint only Magistrate's Complaint only include include the the statement statement that that "the "the Defendant Defendant stated stated that that he did did assault assault 17 17 his uncle." (Decl. (Deel. of ofBrendlynn 0. Joseph, Brendlynn O. Joseph, Magistrate's Magistrate's Con Compl., Jan. 23, 2020). pl., Jan. 2020). The Court finds 18 18 that any dispute dispute about about who who was the the initial initial aggressor aggressor and and what what Defendant Defendant was was intending intending when when he 19 19 started throwing started pots and throwing pots panel1 should and pans should be be for for the the trier trier of of fact fact to to determine. Therefore, upon determine. Therefore, 20 20 review Zarrilli fa of the Zarrilli eview of ctor s, the factors, the Cour Courtt finds finds dismissa dismissall pursuant pur sua nt to to 99 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7.67(b) 7.67(b) 21 21 inappropriate and inappropriate and denies denies Defendant's Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. 22 22 II// 23 23 II// 24 24 II// 25 II// 26 26
27 1 1 In his Motion, Defendant sets Motion, Defendant sets forth that that "both "both Defendant Defendant and and alleged alleged victim victim were drinking beer when Defendant started throwing started throwing pots pots and andpans pans- -not notatatalleged allegedvictim, victim,but butdue duetotosome somefood foodbeing being stolen. stolen. Both Both were interviewed 28 28 conflicting statements and gave conflicting statements -- each claiming that the the other otherstruck struckhim." him." (Mot. (Mot. Dismiss at at 3).
People v.v. Maker People Maka Case No. No. CM0042-20 Decision and Decision and Order
Page Page 4 of of5 1 CONCLUSION 2 For the For the foregoing foregoing reasons, reasons, the the Court Court hereby hereby DENIES DENIES Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motion to to Dismiss Dismiss 3 Based on Based De Minims on De MinimisStatute. Statute.Parties Partiesshall shallreturn returnfor foraaStatus Status Hearing Hearingon onJune June 9, 9, 2025 2025 at at 10:00 10:00 4 a.m. a.m. .\
5 IT IS SO ORDERED ORDEREDthis this 15 2.~1ay day of May, May, 2025 2025. 6
8 HONORABLE VERNONVERNQN P. p. PEREZ Judge, Superior Court of Guam 9
II 11
12 12
14 14
15 15
17 17
18 18
20 20
23 23
26 26
People v. v. Maker Maka Case No. CM0042-20 Decision and Order
Page 5 of of55