FILED
CLERK OF COURT
ef) 2021i OCT 24 PM J: 55 2 SUPERIOR COURT
3 OF GU,.:1M
4
5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 6 ) CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0268-18 7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, ) GPD Report No. 18-12782 )
8 vs. )
)
9 ) DECISION & ORDER ) RE. PEOPLE'S MOTION TO REVOKE IO KEENAN JOHN HOCOG MESA, DEFENDANT'S PROBATION )
DOB: 12/21/1998 II )
)
12 )
Defendant. )
13
14 This matter came before the Honorable Alberto E. Tolentino on August 15, 2024, for a 15 Revocation Hearing. Defendant Keenan John Hocog Mesa ("Defendant") was present with 16 counsel Public Defender Earl Espiritu. Assistant Attorney General Kathleen O'Neil was present 17
18 for the People of Guam ("People"). The Defendant's Probation Officer Meagan McDonald was
19 also present. During the hearing, the court heard the parties' arguments on the People's Motion 20 to Revoke the Defendant's Probation ("Motion"). Following the hearing, the court took the 21 matter under advisement pursuant to Supreme Court of Guam Administrative Rule 06-00 I, 22 CVR 7.l(e)(6)(A) and CR I.I of the Local Rules of the Superior Court of Guam. Having duly 23
24 considered the parties' briefings, oral arguments, and the applicable law, the court now issues
25 this Decision and Order GRANTING the People's Motion to Revoke the Defendant's 26 Probation.
27 \\ 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8 Page I of 16
BACKGROUND
2 A. The Defendant's Violations on Pre-trial Release
3 On May 15, 2018, the Defendant was charged with Possession of a Schedule II 4 Controlled Substance (As a Third Degree Felony). While on pretrial release, the Adult 5 Probation Office ("Probation") filed three (3) violations against the Defendant. For the first 6
7 violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
8 Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. On July 10, 2018, the defendant was ordered to submit to a drug test; however, the 9 defendant opted to admit to ingesting an illegal controlled substance namely 10 "marijuana" on July 7, 2018 via declaration, therefore, no test was conducted. This is his first (1st) positive test while on pretrial release.
11 !st Violation Report (July 10, 2018). For the second violation, the report indicated that the 12
13 Defendant "fail[ed] to report to the Probation Office, in person, once a week. Defendant last
14 reported on July 10, 2018." 2nd Violation Report (July 27, 2018). On July 31, 2018, the court 15 held a Violation Hearing to address the Defendant's two reported violations.
16 During the hearing, Probation notified the court that it had given the Defendant a 17 warning for his first violation. Violation Hr'g Mins. at 10:18:52AM (July 31, 2018). The court 18
19 held the second violation in abeyance and reminded the Defendant of his required condition to
20 check into probation three times a week for drug testing. Id. at 10:20:22AM. 21 \\ 22 \\ 23 \\ 24
25 \\
26 \\ 27 \\ 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18
The court held a Violation Hearing on September 26, 2018, to address the third
2 violation. For the third violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
3 I. Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. On September 24, 20 I 8, the defendant submitted to a drug test which yielded 4 presumptive positive for THC. He subsequently admitted to smoking 5 "marijuana" on September 21, 2018 via written declaration. This is the defendant's [second] (2nd) positive.
6
7 3rd Violation Report (Sept. 24, 2018). During the Violation Hearing, the court issued a five-day
8 sanction but suspended two of those days. Violation Hr'g Mins. at l:25:48-28:06PM (Sept. 26,
9 2018).
On November 9, 2018, the Defendant pied guilty to the charge of Possession of a 11 Schedule II Controlled Substance (As a Third Degree Felony). Order After Hearing (May 15, 12
13 2019). However, the court deferred its acceptance of the Defendant's guilty plea for two years
14 "conditioned on successfully completing all conditions and terms of the deferred plea, 15 otherwise, the Defendant shall serve the full three-year imprisonment term, with credit for time 16 served." Deferred Plea Agreement (Apr. 22, 2019). Notably, the Defendant's deferred plea 17 agreement required his enrollment and completion of the Adult Drug Court Program I ("Adult 18
19 Drug Court"). Id. at 4.
20 B. The Defendant's Violations in Adult Drug Court 21 During the Defendant's enrollment in Adult Drug Court, Probation filed fourteen (14)
22 Violation Reports while the Defendant was in Phase I of the program. For the first violation, the 23
24 report indicated that the Defendant:
25 Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. On November 30, 2018, the probationer submitted to a drug test at the Probation 26 Office which yielded presumptive positive results for methamphetamine. The 27 probationer admitted to smoking the drug "meth" on November 29, 2018.
28 !st Violation Report Phase I (Dec. 5, 2018).
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8
For the second violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
2 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 3 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: December 3, 5, 6, and 12, 2018.
4
5 2nd Violation Report Phase I (Dec. 13, 2018). The court held a Progress Hearing on December
6 14, 2018, to address the two violations in Adult Drug Court. The court imposed, but suspended, 7 a two-day sanction on the Defendant; and also ordered that the Defendant read an essay paper 8 on the effects of drug use. Progress Hr'g Mins. at 10:43:48AM (Dec. 14, 2018). For the third 9
10 violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
11 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 12 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: December 26, 13 28, 31, 2018; and January 2, 2019.
14 3rd Violation Report Phase I (Jan. 3, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on January 4, 15 2019, to address the third violation. In this hearing, the court imposed a three-day sanction but 16 suspended it. Progress Hr'g Mins. at 10:18:21AM (Jan. 4, 2019). For the fourth violation, the 17 report indicated that the Defendant:
18
19 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 20 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: January 11, 14, and 16, 2019.
21
22 4th Violation Report Phase I (Jan. 17, 2019). The court held a Further Proceedings on January
23 18, 2019, to address the fourth violation. In this hearing, the court imposed a three-day sanction 24 on the Defendant. Further Proceedings Mins. at 10:18:21AM (Jan. 4, 2019).
25 \\ 26
27 \\
28 \\
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18
For the fifth violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
2 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 3 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: February 8 and 4 11, 2019.
5 5th Violation Report Phase I (Feb. 14, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on February
6 15, 2019, to address the fifth violation. The court imposed a two-day sanction on the Defendant. 7 Progress Hr'g Mins. at 9:30:00AM (Feb. 15, 2019). For the sixth violation, the report indicated 8 that the Defendant:
9
lO Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. On February 15, 2019, the probationer submitted to a drug test at the Probation Office 11 which yielded presumptive positive results for methamphetamine. The probationer admitted to smoking the drug "meth" on February 13, 2019.
12
13 6th Violation Report Phase I (Feb. 21, 2019). The court addressed the sixth violation in a
14 Further Proceedings held on February 22, 2019. For the seventh violation, the report indicated 15 that the Defendant:
16 1. Failed to obey orders by the court and Adult Drug Court Program rules. On 17 April 10, 2019, the probationer submitted to a urinalysis test and tested presumptive positive for marijuana. The probationer admitted via written 18 declaration to smoking "weed" on April 5, 2019.
19 This marks the probationer's 3rd POS and 3rd admission since entering phase I 20 of the ADC I program. 21 2. Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing.
22 The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates:
23 February 8 and 11, 2019. 24 7th Violation Report Phase I (Apr. 18, 2019). The court held a Further Proceedings on April 19, 25 2019, to address the Defendant's seventh violation.
26
27 \\
28 \\
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18
A few weeks after the Defendant filed his Deferred Plea Agreement with the court,
2 Probation filed an eighth violation, indicating that the Defendant:
3 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 4 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: April 19, 26, 5 and 29 2019.
6 8th Violation Report Phase I (May 2, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on May I 0, 7 2019, to address the Defendant's eighth violation. For the ninth violation, the report indicated 8 that the Defendant:
9
10 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 11 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: May 29, 31, June 3, 10, and 14, 2019.
12
13 9th Violation Report Phase I (June 20, 20 I 9). The court held a Progress Hearing on June 28,
14 2019, to address the ninth violation. In this hearing, the court placed a two-day sanction on the 15 Defendant, which was suspended. Progress Hr'g Mins. at 10:35:50AM (June 28, 2019). For the 16 tenth violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
17 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The 18 probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 19 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: July 1, 5, 8, 12, 15,17, and 23, 2019.
20 10th Violation Report Phase I (July 25, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on August 2, 21
22 2019, addressing the tenth violation and imposing a two-day sanction on the Defendant.
23 Progress Hr'g Mins. at 10:l 7:09AM (Aug. 2, 2019). 24 \\ 25 \\ 26
27 \\
28 \\
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8
For the eleventh violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
2 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 3 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: August 9, 12, 16, 19, 21, 23, 26, and 28, 2019.
4
5 11th Violation Report Phase I (Aug. 29, 2019). The court held a hearing on August 30, 2019, to
6 address the eleventh violation. However, the Defendant was not present and had last checked in 7 with Probation on August 14, 2019. Hr'g Mins. at 10:36:30AM (Aug.30, 2019). For the twelfth 8 violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
9
10 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 11 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: August 30;
September 3, 4, 6, 9, and 11, 2019.
12
13 12th Violation Report Phase I (Sept. 13, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on September
14 13, 2019, addressing the twelfth violation and a possible stipulation to transfer the Defendant to 15 traditional probation instead of Adult Drug Court. Progress Hr'g at 3:35:37PM (Sept. 13, 2019).
16 For the thirteenth violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
17 Failed to report to the Probation Office for three times weekly drug testing. The 18 probationer is required to report for drug testing every Monday, Wednesday, 19 Friday, and as instructed and failed report on the following dates: September 16, 18, 20, 23, 25, 27, 30; October 2, 2019.
20 13th Violation Report Phase I (Oct. 3, 2019). The court held a Progress Hearing on October 4, 21
22 2019, to address the Defendant's thirteenth violation. In the hearing, the court kept this violation
23 in abeyance but transferred the Defendant over to the supervision of the Adult Probation Office. 24 Progress Hr'g Mins. at 10:25:23AM (Oct. 4, 2019). In doing so, the court terminated the 25 Defendant from the Adult Drug Court I Program. Id.
26
27 \\
28 \\
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8
Upon the Defendant's termination from Adult Drug Court, the Defendant received a
2 fourteenth violation. For this violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
3 Failed to report to three times weekly in person as ordered. The probationer failed to report since being terminated from the Adult Drug Court Program on October 4 4, 2019.
5 14th Violation Report Phase I (Nov. 5, 2019).
6
7 C. The Defendant's Violations under Traditional Probation
8 The court subsequently issued a bench warrant for the Defendant on November 6, 2019.
9 Two years later, this court was assigned to this matter. 1 The warrant was returned on October 6, IO 2021. During the Return of Warrant proceeding, the court indicated that all conditions of 11 probation were outstanding despite the Defendant's deferred probationary period expiring on 12
13 October 3, 2021. Return of Warrant Mins. at 10:30:23AM (Oct. 6, 2021). Finding good cause
14 therein, the court extended the Defendant's probation for six (6) months to allow the Defendant 15 to complete the terms of his probation. Id. On February 1, 2022, the court granted another 16 extension of probation; the new expiration date was July 6, 2022. Progress Hr'g Mins. at 17 2:21:49PM (Feb. I, 2022).
18
19 That same month, Probation filed a first violation report against the Defendant since his
20 transfer to traditional probationary supervision. For the first violation, the report indicated that 21 the Defendant:
22 Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. The 23 Probationer submitted to a drug test on February 28, 2022, with the probation office and tested presumptive positive for methamphetamines/THC. He admitted 24 to ingesting illegal controlled substances, namely, "meth and weed" on February 25 26, 2022 via declaration. This is his first (1st) positive test.
26 !st Violation Report (Feb. 28, 2022). 27 \\ 28 1 Between May 7, 2018, and October 5, 2021, this matter was before the Honorable Anita A. Sukola.
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8
For the second violation, the report indicated that the Defendant:
2 Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. The Probationer submitted to a drug test on March 21, 2022, with the probation office 3 and tested presumptive positive for methamphetamines/THC. He admitted to ingesting illegal controlled substances, namely, "marijuana and ice" on March 19, 4 2022 via declaration. This is his second (2 nd ) positive test.
5 2nd Violation Report (Mar. 21, 2022). The court held a Violation Hearing on May 11, 2022, to 6 address the Defendant's violations. In the hearing, Probation requested that the court impose a 7
8 five-day sanction on the Defendant. Violation Hr'g at 2:22:48PM (May 11, 2022). The court
9 granted this request and committed the Defendant to serve the sanction at the Department of IO Corrections. Id. A third violation report was filed indicating that the Defendant:
II 1. Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. The 12 Probationer submitted to a drug test on May 17, 2022, with the probation 13 office and tested presumptive positive for methamphetamines/THC. He admitted to ingesting illegal controlled substances, namely, "marijuana laced 14 with meth" on May 10, 2022 via declaration. This is his third (3 rd) positive test.
15 2. Failure to submit proof of attendance or completion of a drug .rehabilitation 16 program.
3. Failure to make monthly payments towards his fine and court cost totaling 17 five thousand eighty dollars ($5,080.00). He has failed to make any payments.
4. Failure to perform and complete eighty-six (86) hours of community service.
18 5. Failure to submit proof of attendance or completion of twenty-three (23) out 19 of twenty-four (24) sober support meetings.
20 3rd Violation Report (June 16, 2022). Pursuant to this third violation, the court issued a warrant 21 of arrest for the Defendant on June 24, 2022. Six days later, the warrant was returned and 22 Probation filed a fourth violation against the Defendant. For this violation, the report indicated 23
24 that the Defendant:
25 Failed to refrain from ingesting/consuming illegal controlled substances. On June 30, 2022, the Probationer reported to the Probation Office. He admitted to 26 ingesting illegal controlled substances, namely, "meth and weed" on June 29, 27 2022 via declaration. No test was conducted. This is his fourth (4 th ) positive test.
28 4th Violation Report (June 30, 2022).
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18
The court held a Return of Warrant proceeding on July 5, 2022, where it vacated the
2 warrant and sanctioned the Defendant for forty-five (45) days at the Department of Corrections.
3 Return of Warrant Mins. at 11 :03:40AM (July 5, 2022). A fifth violation was filed indicating 4 that the Defendant:
5 1. Failed to report to the Probation Office two (2) times a week for drug testing.
6 The probationer is ordered to report to the Probation Office every Tuesday and Thursday. He last reported on September 29, 2022. The probationer has 7 failed to report since. Please note, on September 27, 2022, the Undersigned 8 reminded the Probationer about his reporting requirements.
2. Failure to submit proof of attendance or completion of a drug rehabilitation 9 program. IO 3. Failure to make monthly payments towards his fine and court cost totaling five thousand seventy dollars ($5,070.00). His last payment was on June 23, II 2022 and he has failed to make any payments since.
4. Failure to perform and complete six (6) hours of community service.
12
13 5th Violation Report (October 26, 2022). On October 31, 2022, the People filed its Motion,
14 requesting the court to revoke the Defendant's probation. Pursuant to the Defendant's fifth 15 violation, the court issued a warrant of arrest on December 5, 2022, which was not returned 16 until September 6, 2023. At the Return of Warrant proceeding, the court noted that the 17 Defendant's probation had expired - after three extensions - on November 15, 2022. Return of 18
19 Warrant Mins. at 12: 19:1 lPM (Sept. 8, 2023). The court then vacated the warrant, released the
20 Defendant, and set the matter for a Revocation Hearing. 21 During the Revocation Hearing, Probation indicated that the Defendant had completed 22 all other conditions of his probation except for treatment and the outstanding balance on his 23 fine. Rev. Hr'g Mins. at 4:03:55-04:09PM (Oct. 25, 2023). The court held the Motion in 24
25 abeyance, pending his completion of those remaining conditions of probation. Id. at 4:04:38-
26 04:51PM. 27 \\ 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8 Page IO of 16
On January 22, 2024, Probation filed a sixth violation against the Defendant. The report
2 listed the following violations:
3 I. Failure to report to the Probation Office three (3) times a week for drug testing. The probationer is ordered to report to the Probation Office every 4 Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. He last reported on December 7, 2023, and 5 has failed to report since. Please note, the Undersigned has counseled the Probationer about his reporting requirements multiple times.
6 2. Failure to submit proof of attendance or completion of a drug rehabilitation 7 program. 3. Failure to make monthly payments towards his fine and court cost totaling 8 four thousand five hundred seventy dollars ($4,570.00). His last payment was on June 23, 2022 and he has failed to make any payments since.
9
10 6th Violation Report (Jan. 22, 2024). Due to a sixth violation being filed, the court issued
11 another bench warrant for the Defendant's arrest on February 14, 2024, which was returned on
12 June 26, 2024. On July 16, 2024, the court set the matter for another Revocation Hearing.
13 Return of Warrant Mins. at 4:24: 16PM (July 16, 2024).
14 D. The Defendant's Revocation Hearing on August 15, 2024 15
16 At the recent Revocation Hearing, the Defendant requested for another opportunity to
17 complete the remaining terms of his probation. Rev. Hr'g Mins. at l:l l:20-16:15PM (Aug. 15, 18 2024). The Defendant referenced a Stipulation and Order that transferred the Defendant from 19 Adult Drug Court to traditional probation, stating that:
20 If the Defendant does not complete these terms and conditions within the two-
21 year deferral period, the court may accept and enter Defendant's plea as set 22 out in the Deferred Plea Agreement and order an additional three (3) years of probation to complete these terms and conditions or impose a sentence of 23 up to three (3) years of incarceration and a fine of up to five thousand dollars 24 ($5,000.00).
25 Stip. & Order (Nov. 6, 2019). Based on this provision, the Defendant requested that the court
26 hold off on revocation, enter the judgment in this case, and impose an additional three years of 27 probation. Rev. Hr'g Mins. at 1:14:04-16:39PM (Aug. 15, 2024). Contrary to the Defendant's 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-! 8 Page II ofl6 position, the People reiterated its Motion supporting revocation. Id. at 1: 16:52-l 7:03PM. After
2 hearing the parties' arguments, the court took the matter under advisement.
3 DISCUSSION 4 If the court finds that the Defendant has "inexcusably failed to comply with a substantial 5 requirement imposed as a condition of the order," it may revoke probation and sentence or 6
7 resentence the offender. 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2). If a court chooses to revoke probation, the court
8 may sentence the defendant to any sentence that may it have originally imposed. 9 GCA § 9 80.66(b ). However, it shall not revoke probation for violation of a condition unless the court 10 determines that revocation "will best satisfy the ends of justice and the best interests of the 11 public" under all circumstances. 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2).
12
13 The Supreme Court of Guam held that "probation is a favor granted by the state, not a
14 right to which a criminal defendant is entitled." People v. Camacho, 2009 Guam 6, 26 (quoting 15 Parker v. State, 676 N.E.2d 1083, 1085 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997)). To revoke a Defendant's 16 probation, the court must make two determinations. First, the court must "make a factual 17 determination that a violation of a condition of probation has actually occurred." Camacho, 18
19 2009 Guam 6 , 27 (quoting Parker, 676 N.E.2d 1083 at 1085). If the violation is proven, then
20 the court must "determine if the violation warrants revocation of probation." Id. 21 A. The Defendant violated the conditions of his probation.
22 The standard for determining whether a probationer violated a condition of probation is 23
24 that "the evidence and the facts be such as reasonably necessary to satisfy the judge that the
25 probationer's conduct has not been as required by the conditions of probation." Camacho, 2009 26 Guam 6 , 30 (quoting People v. Angoco, 1998 Guam IO , 7). When facing revocation, "the 27
28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18 defendant bears the burden of showing an excuse for failure to comply with the condition." Id.
2 (quoting State v. Peters, 609 A.2d 40, 43 (N.J. 1992)).
3 In this case, the Defendant had accumulated: three violations on pre-trial release; 4 fourteen violations in Adult Drug Court; and six violations under the supervision of traditional 5 Probation. The court can make a factual determination that all these violations actually occurred, 6
7 as evidenced by the Defendant's declarations to the violations, the Defendant's positive test
8 results, and his admission on the record to the violations. During the last Revocation Hearing, 9 the court inquired with the Defendant himself about his failure to comply with probation, to
which he apologized for but had informed the court of his struggle to "get back on his feet."
II Rev. Hr'g Mins. at l:19:45-20:37PM (Aug. 15, 2024). Based on the violation reports, 12
13 Probation's testimony at the Revocation Hearing, and the parties' arguments, the court finds that
14 the Defendant has violated multiple conditions of his probation on several occasions. 15 B. The Defendant's violations warrant revocation of probation.
16 With regard to probation revocation, the Supreme Court of the United States has noted 17 that "the State clearly has an interest in punishment and deterrence, but this interest can often be 18
19 served fully by alternative means ... [T]he state is not powerless to enforce judgments against
20 those financially unable to pay a fine. For example, the sentencing court could extend the time 21 for making payments, or reduce the fine, or direct that the probationer perform some form of 22 labor or public service in lieu of the fine." Bearden v. Georgia, 461 U.S. 660, 671-72 (internal 23
24 citations and quotations omitted).
25 As mentioned earlier, the court may revoke probation if it finds that the probationer has 26 "inexcusably failed to comply with a substantial requirement imposed as a condition of the 27 order." 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2). In other words, a probationer's violation of probation warrants 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18 revocation when the violation upsets the intent of the probation conditions. In Camacho, the
2 Supreme Court of Guam held that the probationer's failure to report for drug testing was serious
3 enough to warrant revocation when considering the condition being violated was treatment. 4 Camacho, 2009 Guam 6 ~ 32. Despite not paying the fine as required under probation, the 5 Supreme Court of Guam reasoned that failure to pay a fine alone was not as serious as not 6
7 reporting for drug tests, because the defendant was convicted of drug-related offenses and had
8 drug testing listed as a probation of condition to ensure the defendant remained sober. Id. 9 Like the probationer in Camacho, the only conditions pending completion were the IO Defendant's treatment and fine. During the Revocation hearing, the Defendant emphasized the II importance of treatment being completed in this case; which is something the Defendant does 12
13 not believe can be accomplished in prison. Rev. Hr'g Mins. at l:15:30-15:34PM (Aug. 15,
14 2024). The Defendant admitted to the court that although he had stopped showing up to 15 Lighthouse Recovery Center for treatment, he had nonetheless completed his assessment with 16 them. Id. at l:12:38-12:46PM. If the court chooses not to revoke probation, the Defendant 17 believes that he can receive the benefits of working to support his family, treatment outside the 18
19 confines of the Department of Corrections, and possible closure of the case after treatment is
20 completed. Id. at l:15:43-16:15PM. 21 When reviewing the violations and time the Defendant absconded in this case, the People 22 argued that the Defendant has failed to show "any desire to be compliant with the terms of 23
24 probation." Rev. Hr'g Mins. at I: l 7:38-17:46PM (Aug. 15, 2024).
25 The substantial requirement imposed as a condition in this case is the Defendant's 26 completion of treatment. The purpose of a condition for treatment is sustained sobriety; 27 however, sobriety becomes unattainable without the right support. The court had given the 28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-18 Page 14 ofl6
Defendant multiple opportunities before considering revocation, including three extensions of
2 his probationary period to get back in compliance and complete his last condition of probation:
3 treatment. Instead, the Defendant absconded, had several warrants issued for his arrest for 4 failure to report, and continued to test positive for methamphetamine or THC. While the court is 5 aware of the difficulties in dealing with addiction, the Defendant cannot expect to overcome his 6 addiction if he will not put in the effort to attend and complete treatment programs provided to 7
8 him. 9 Unless the court determines that revocation "will best satisfy the ends of justice and the 10 best interests of the public" under all circumstances, the court shall not revoke probation for II violation of a condition. 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2). Here, the Defendant has had over five years to 12
13 independently complete the conditions of probation. While the Defendant believes that his
14 addiction treatment cannot be accomplished in the Department of Corrections, the Defendant 15 has shown that he cannot complete treatment outside of it. In Guam, the Department of 16 Corrections provides a Residential Substance Abuse Treatment ("RSAT") program for its 17 inmates who are battling addiction. Rather than leave the Defendant to seek treatment on his 18
19 own, the court believes that it is in the best interests of the public and will best satisfy the ends
20 of justice to allow the Department of Corrections to supervise and assist the defendant on his 21 path to recovery through the RSAT program.
22 Because the Defendant has inexcusably failed to comply with treatment as a substantial 23
24 condition of his probation, the court finds that revocation of the Defendant's probation will best
25 satisfy the ends of justice and the best interests of the public. Therefore, the court grants the
26 People's Motion to revoke the Defendant's probation. 27
28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-l 8
CONCLUSION
2 For the reasons stated above, the Court hereby REVOKES the Defendant's probation in
3 the above-captioned matter. The Defendant is hereby SENTENCED to serve THREE years of 4 incarceration at the Department of Corrections, Mangilao, and shall receive credit for time 5 already served in this matter. The Court shall issue a Judgment concurrent with this Decision 6
7 and Order revoking the Defendant's probation, and imposing the remainder of the Defendant's
8 three-year sentence.
9
A Progress Hearing is scheduled before this court on November 27, 2024, at 2:00PM.
11
12 SO ORDERED this
OCT 2 ~ 202~
-----------
13
14
15 _.
16
17 HONORABLE ALBERTO E. TOLENTINO 18 Judge, Superior Court of Guam
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Decision & Order Re. People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation People v. Mesa, CF0268-I 8