,\- 1
n .
F I L L_ LJ'
SUPERQOQ cg
'CDU PI
Gt' Gum
l m
1
2 `€"'¥ Q*' E;8L=L»R.2
QL5ris*' Pi-1
*I I w.
3
4
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, GUAM, ) CRIMINAL CRIMINALCASENO.
CASE NO.CM0135-21
CM0135-21
8 ) GPD Report ReportNo.:
No.:21-12252/21-12286
2 l-12252/21-12286
)
9 vs. VS. )
10 10 ) DECISION AND ORDER ) DENYING
DENYING DEFENDANT'S
11 Il ) MOTION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
DISMISS
JORDON JEROME JORDON JEROMESANTOS SANTOSNAPUTI,
NAPUTI, ) DUE TO CIVIL COMPROMISE 12 aka Jorden Jordan Jerome Jerome Santos
SantosNaputi,
Naputi, )
DOB:09/21/1996 DOB: 09/21/1996 )
13 __________ ))
14 14
INTRODUCTION
15 15
16 This matter came came before the Honorable Judge Maria T. Cenzon Judge Maria Cenzon on
on August
August 23,
23, 2023, for a
17 17 hearing Defendant Jordon hearing on Defendant JordonJerome JeromeSantos
SantosNaputi's
Naputi's(the
(the"Defendant)
"Defendant) Motion
Motion to Dismiss Due
18 to Civil Civil Compromise Compromise (the
(the "Motion").
"Motion").Defendant
Defendant was
was present
present via Zoom with
with counsel
counsel Assistant
19 19 Alternate Public Defender Defender Theresa
Theresa C.
C. Dunphy.
Dunphy. Also
Also present
present during
during the hearing were Assistant Assistant
20
Attorney General Diaz-Aguon and General Leah Diaz-Aguon Officer Emoree Martinez. The and Probation Officer The Court Court took
took the
21
22 matter underadvisement matter under advisement pursuant pursuant to CVR
to CVR 7.1(e)(6)(D)
7.l(e)(6)(D) ofofthetheLOCAL LOCALRULES
RULES OF
OF THE
23 SUPERIOR SUPERIORCOURT COURTOF
OFGUAM
GUAMand
andAdministrative
AdministrativeRule
RuleNos.
Nos.06-001 , and
06-001, and after
after considering
considering the
24 24 pleadings on file and and after
after reviewing
reviewingthe
theapplicable
applicablestatutes
statutes and
and case law, the
the Court
Court now issues
issues
25 this Decision Decision and Order DENYING the Order DENYING the Defendant's Motion.
26
27
28 People vs.
People vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, Naputi, Criminal Case
Case No.
No. CMOl35-2
CM0135-21l
Decision Decision and re.Defendant's and Order re. Defendant'sMotion Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page 11 of7
off
FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1
2 Defendant Defendant isis charged
chargedwith
withtwo
two counts
countsof
of Family
Family Violence
Violence (As
(As aa Misdemeanor)
Misdemeanor) in
m
3 violation of violation of 9 9 GCA
GCA §§ 30.l0(a)(l)("recklessly 30.10(a)(l )("recklesslycause causeororattempt
attempttotocause
cause bodily
bodily injury
injury to
to aa family
family
4 . . . -
household member"). or household member"). Magistrate's Maglstrate's Complaint
Complaint (May The alleged (May 21, 2021). The alleged vlctlms victims are
are the
the
55 Defendant's Defendant's mother and and sister.
sister.
6
7 The Declaration re Civil
Civil Compromise
Compromise of
ofeach
each victim
victim filed
filedby
byDefendant
Defendant on
on May
May 1,
1, 2023,
2023,
8 contained the the following
following general
general statements,
statements, "I,
"I, the
the undersigned,
undersigned, and
and [Defendant],
[Defendant], can
can and
and have
9 9 reached an amicable reached an settlementand amicablesettlement andwe wehave
haveresolved
resolved our
ourpast
pastdifferences
differencesand
anddifficulties.
difficulties.All
All
10 10 restitution has restitution has been been paid
paid in
in full
full to
to me
me by and request by [Defendant] and request this this case
case be
be dismissed."
dismissed." The
The
11 oppose the
People oppose the Defendant's Defendant's Motion arguing that Motion arguing that "the
"the focus
focus of
of Guam's
Guam's civil
civil compromise
compromise
12 12
113 statute statute isis satisfaction satisfactionreceived
receivedfor
forthe
thevictim's
victim's injury."
injury." People's's Opp.
Opp. to
to Def's
Def's Mot.
Mot. to Dismiss
Dismiss
14 14 Due to Civil Civil Compromise
Compromise at
at 33 (Aug. 23,
23, 2023)(the
2023)(the "Opposition").
"Opposition").The
ThePeople
People further
further argue
argue that
15 15 it is is "[t]he
"[t]hePeople's
People'sposition...that
position ... thatsatisfaction satisfaction ofofthe
thevictim's
victim'sinjury
injuryisisbest
bestaddressed
addressed through
through
16 16 rehabilitation of the the Defendant through the the criminal justice
justice system.
system. Public interest is best served 17
18 by getting the the Defendant the
the treatment
treatmenthe
heneeds
needstotoprevent
preventfurther
furtherfamily
familyviolence."
violence." Id.
Id.
18
19 19 On August 24, 24, 2023,
2023,the
theDefendant
Defendantfiled
filedhis
hisReply
Replyto
toPeople's
People's Opposition to Defendant's
20 Motion Motion to Dismiss to Civil Compromise Dismiss Due to Compromise ("Reply").
("Reply").InInhis
hisReply,
Reply,the
theDefendant
Defendantrebuts
rebuts the
21 People's People'sargument argument that the victims'
victims' statements
statements do not meet the satisfaction of injury requirement · 22 under 8 GCA GCA §§ 80.90.
80.90. The
The Defendant
Defendant argues that "section argues that "section (b)
(b) of
of 8 GCA §§80.90
8 GCA 80.90 only
onlyrequires
requires an
an
23 24 individual individual to 'acknowledge 'acknowledge that
that he
he has received satisfaction for the injury.'
injury' The
Thestatute
statute does not
24
25 25 require any more specificity specificity as
as to
to satisfaction.
satisfaction. Certainly,
Certainly, this
this requirement
requirement has
has been met with
with the
26 26 signed declarations declarations as
aswell
well as
as the
thestatements
statementsprovided
providedby
bythe
thevictims."
victims." Reply
Reply at 1.
27
28 People vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, vs. Jordon Naputi, Criminal Case No. CM0135-21 Case No. CM0135-21
Decision and Order
Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 22 of7
of f
LEGAL LEGAL ANALYSIS
1
2 Under Under 8
8 GCA
GCA §80.90,
§80.90, "[w]hen
"[w]henthe
thedefendant
defendant has
has been
been charged with the
charged with commission of the commission of
3 an offense which is not a felony for for which
which the
the person
person injured
injured by the
the act
act constituting the offense constituting the
4 . . . . . . .
has a remedy by aa c1v11 remedy by civil action"
action"and
and"if
"if the
the person
person injured
injured appears
appears before,
before, or
.orfiled
filed [her]
[her] declaration
declaration
5 the court in which the in, the the criminal criminal action is pending at any any time before trial
trial and
and acknowledges
acknowledges
6
7 that [she] has that [she] has received satisfaction from the injury," then then "the
"the court
court may,
may, upon
upon payment of the
payment of
8 costs incurred, incurred, order
orderthe
thecriminal
criminalaction dismissed."1 actiondismissed."
9 Guam's Guam's Civil
CivilCompromise
Compromise Statute
Statute is
is based
based upon California Penal upon California Penal Code Code §§
§§ 1377-1378,
1377-1378,
10 10 and, inthe and, in theabsence absenceof
ofbinding
bindingprecedent,
precedent,"California
"California case
case law [is] persuasive
persuasive absent a compelling compelling
11 11 reason to to deviate." v. Hall, deviate." People v. ,i 18. The Guam 1118.
Hall, 2004 Guam The Court observes, observes, however, that
that Guam's
Guam's
12 12
13 13 Civil CivilCompromise CompromiseStatute
Statute may
may be applied more broadly than that thatof
of California's
California's because
because Guam's
14 14 law did not adopt adoptthe
theprovisions
provisions in
inCalifornia
California excluding misdemeanors committed with misdemeanors committed with felonious
15 15 intent, misdemeanorscommitted intent, misdemeanors committedriotously, riotously,or
or misdemeanors
misdemeanorscommitted
committedupon
uponoffices
offices of
of justice.
16 16 People v.
v. Moulton,
Moulton, 131
131 Cal.App.3d Supp. 10, 20 Supp. 10, 20 (Cal.
(Cal. App.
App. Dep't
Dep't Super.
Super. Ct. 1982).
1982). California
17 17 has also, since has also, since Guam's Guam's adoption
adoptionof§
of § 80.90, seen fit
80.90, seen fit to
to further exclude offenses further exclude the nature in the
offenses in of nature of
18 18
19 19 family violence violence or
orcrimes
crimes committed
committed upon
upon the
the elderly
elderly and
and children.
children. Although
Although Guam
Guam has
has not
20 20 followed followed suit.
suit.
21 Although California specifically specifically excludes certain offense excludes certain offense from civil civil compromise,
compromise, the
the
22 Court still exercises its discretion to permit penni compromise
compromiseofofaamisdemeanor misdemeanor by
by examining
examining the
the same
23
24 24
25
1 This statute shall be referred to herein as Guam's Civil Compromise statute.
26 1 This statute shall be referred to herein as Guam's Civil Compromise statute.
27
28 People People vs.
vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, Naputi, Criminal Case
Case No. CM0135-21
Decision Decision and
and Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 33of7
off
criteria followed by the the California courts: 1) if courts: 1) if the
the civil
civil injury
injury is
is coextensive
coextensive with
with the
the criminal
criminal
1
2 violation, 2)
violation; 2) whether full vindication whether full vindication of the public injury injury can
can be achieved
achieved through
through a private
private
3 settlement, and 3)
settlement; and 3) if if the proposed compromise compromise is
is voluntarily
voluntarily entered into
into by
by the
the victim.
victim.Moulton
4 at 21-23 21-23 (emphasis added).
added).
5 The Defendant here 1sis charged Defendant here chargedwith withtwo
two (2)
(2) counts of Family
counts of Family Violence Violence (As
(As a
6
Misdemeanor). Although Although the
the charged offenses are not felonies, the the Court
Court is concerned
concerned with the
7
8 offenses offenses with which the the Defendant hasbeen
Defendant has beencharged:
charged:22counts
countsofofFamily
FamilyViolence
Violence (As
(As aa
9 9 Misdemeanor).
Misdemeanor). The Court finds that the finds that the particular particularoffense
offenseof
of family
family violence does
does not have a
10 10 corresponding remedyin corresponding remedy in civil civil law. Indeed,
Indeed, the California statutes from which statutes from which Guam's Guam's Civil
Civil
11 Compromise statute statute is
is derived includes
includes offenses against a family or or household
household member
member as
as the
12
13 13 type of type criminal case ofcriminal which is case which is not to civil subject to
not subject civil compromise. Thus, while compromise. Thus, while 8 GCA §§80.90 8 GCA 80.90 does
does
14 14 not explicitly explicitly state thestatute state that the statuteisisinapplicable inapplicabletotocharges
chargesinvolving
involvingfamily
familyviolence,
violence, California
California
15 law, which which served
served as the
the basis
basisfor
forGuam's
Guam's civil
civil compromise statute, statute, excludes offenses offenses committed
16 16 against the the family
family from its civil
civil compromise
compromise statute.
statute.
17 17 California California Penal
Penal Code
Code§ 1377 provides:
1377 provides:
18 18
19 19 When the person injured by an When an act constituting aa misdemeanor has a remedy remedy by a
civil civil action,
action, the
the offense
offense may
may be
be compromised,
compromised, as as provided provided in
in§ 1378,
1378, except
except when
when
20 it is committed as asfollows:
follows:
21 (a) (21) By
By or
or upon officer of
upon an officer ofjustice, while while in
in the
the execution
execution of
of the
the duties of
duties of
22 his or her heroffice.
office.
(b) (b) Riotously.
Riotously.
23 (c) (c) With an
With intent to
an intent to commit
commit aa felony.
felony.
24 (d) (d> In
In violation
violation of
ofany
anycourt
courtorder
orderasas described
described inin §§273.6
273.6 or
or 273.65.
273.65.
24
25
26
27
28 People People vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, vs. Jordon Napufi, Criminal Case No. CM0135-21 Case No. CM0135-21
Decision and Order
Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 4 of7
of 7
(e) (G) family or By or upon any family or household household member,
member, or upon any person when when
I involves any person described in §§ 621]
the violation involves 6211 of ofthe
the Family
Family
2 Codes or subdivision Code2 or subdivision (b)
(b) of
of§]3700
§13700 of
ofthis
this Codes.
Code3
(D (f) Upon an
Upon an elder,
elder, in
in violation of §§ 368
violation of 368 of this Code of this 15656 of or §§ 15656
Code or of the
the
3 Welfare and Institutions Code.
(g) (8) Upon
Upon aa child,
child, as
as described
described in
in§ 647.6
647.6 or
or 11165.6.
11165.6.
4
5 Cal.l. P C Pen. Code §§ 1377 en. C 1377 (empha sis aadded).
(emphasis dded). In
In CCalifornia,
a lifor nia the
the legisla tive pur
legislative pose of
purpose of civil
civil
6 compromise is to remove from criminal criminal prosecution offense for which there is an adequate civil 7 remedy instead instead of
of "subjecting the accused to criminal criminal sanctions
sanctions for the welfare welfare of society in
8 v. Stephen,
general." People v. Stephen, 227 Cal. Rptr. 380, 388 (Cal. Appl. 1986).
9
10 10 Although California specifically excludes California specifically excludes certain certain offense
offense from
from civil
civil compromise, the
11 11 Court still still exercises
exercises its
itsdiscretion
discretiontotopennit
penni compromise of
of a misdemeanor
misdemeanor by examining the same
12 12 criteria followed followed by the California courts:
courts: 1)
1) if
if the
the civil injury
injury is
is coextensive with the criminal 113 violation, 2) whether full violation; 2) full vindication vindication of the public injury injury can be achieved
achieved through
through aa private
private
14 14 settlement, settlement; and 3) if the the proposed
proposed compromise is voluntarily entered into by the victim. People v.
15 15
16 16 Moulton, 131 CaLApp.3d Moulton, Cal.App.3d Supp. 10, 10, 21-23 (Cal. App. Depot Dep't Super. Ct. 1982).
17 17 Applying the Moulton factors, factors, the Court finds:
finds: 1) Civil injury is not coexistive with the 18 1 criminal violation. is irrelevant violation. It is irrelevant in in family
family violence cases that a victim actually actually suffer bodily
19 19 injury because the charge is that the the defendant
defendant recklessly caused "or attempted to cause" bodily 20 20 injury. Family violence violence may
may be committed with or
committed with or without without injury;
injury; 2)
2) Dismissal
Dismissal due
duetoto civil
civil
21
22 compromise compromise of the family family violence charges will not not result
result in "full
"full vindication
vindication of
of the
the public
public
23 injury." The impact of a family injury." The family violence charge is felt felt not only by the victims themselves but 24 24
25 25 2 2 Cal. Fem. Code § 6211 is California's "Domestic Violence" statute.
Cal. Fam. Code§ 6211 is California's "Domestic Violence" statute. 3 Cal. Penal Code § 13700 defines "Domestic Violence" as abuse committed against an adult or a minor 3 26 Cal. Penal Code § 13700 defines "Domestic Violence" against an adult or a minor who is a spouse, former spouse, spouse, former spouse, cohabitant, cohabitant,former
former cohabitant,
cohabitant, or
or person
person with
with whom the suspect has had suspect has hadaachild
child or
or is havin
having
27 or has had had aa dating
dating or
or engagement
engagement relationship.
relationship.
28 People vs. Jordon Jerome Santos vs. Jordon Santos Naputi, Naputi, Criminal Case No. CM0 Case No. CMO[35-21
135-21
Decision and Order
Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 5 of7 other family members, loved ones and those those involved in the family dynamic. The public interest publicinterest
I
2 is concerned when family violence charges can be dismissed on the general claim that there has
3 been some pecuniary settlement because there there is
is a legitimate concern that family family members may
4 . . . . .
coerced or be coerced or somehow somehow "encouraged"
"encouraged"totoclaim
claimfull
fullrestltutlon
restitutionhas
hasbeen
been satisfied
satisfied in
in order
order to protect
5 a loved one from criminal prosecution.
prosecution. The Court recognizes recognizes that,
that, unlike California, Guam did 6
not specifically preclude a family violence charge from its civil compromise statute, statute; however, the
7
88 rationale prohibiting civil rationale prohibiting civil compromise compromise inin family
family violence
violence cases
cases is
is because
because it is difficult
difficult to
9 determine whether or not an alleged victim actually received determine whether received satisfaction satisfaction for the injury. Thus, 10 10 civil compromise of a family violence offense does not present "circumstances such that through 11 private settlement the the public
public is fully vindicated.", vindicated."; 3) the Court Court has no information to contradict contradict
12 12
113 the Victims' statements statements that
that they acted
acted voluntarily in
in declaring
declaring satisfaction
satisfaction of
of restitution.
14 Applying the provisions of Section 80.90 and the analysis herein, this Court has found 15 15 that family violence charges are not the type for which adequate adequate compensation under the Civil 16 16 Compromise statute can be be readily
readily shown. See,
See, People v. Kinsella,
Kinsella, Criminal Case No. CM1197-
CMl 197-
17 17
12, Decision and Order On Def.'s Def.'s Mot.
Mot. toto Dismiss
Dismiss(May
(May3,3,2013)(Borda1lo,
2013)(Bordallo, J.)(also
J.)(also denying
18
19 dismissal on de De minimis
minims grounds because "[t]he risk of of harm to society that arises from acts of of
20 20 Assault and Family Assault Family Violence are significant and cannot cannot be
be viewed
viewedas
astrivial
trivial....
...."),
"); People v. Smith
21 & Petty, Petty, Criminal Case Case No. CM0410-17
CM0410-l 7 (Jan.
(Jan. 24,
24, 2018)(Barcinas,
2018)(Barcinas, J.),
J.); People
People v.
v. Evaristo,
Evaristo,
22 Criminal Criminal Case Case No. CM0598- I8, Decision CM0598-18, Decision and
and Order
Order (Apr. 2, 2019)(Perez, J.), J.); People v. Salgado,
Salgado,
23 Criminal Criminal Case Case No. CMOl25-23,
CM0125-23, Order Re. Dismissal Due to Civil Compromise Compromise (Oct. 24, 2023)(in 24
25 the context of of violation of
of court
court order)(Cenzon,
order)(Cenzon, J.),
J.); People v. Nemecheck, Nemecheck, Criminal Case No.
26 Clv[0212-23, Decisionand andOrder
OrderDenying
Denying Def.'s
Def.'s Mot.
Mot. to
to Dismiss
Dismiss Due to Civil
CM0212-23, Decision Civil Compromise Compromise
27
28 People vs. Santos Naputi, vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, Criminal Criminal Case
Case No. CM0135-21I
Decision and Order
Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 6 of7
of
(Nov. 17, 2023)(Lamorena, P.J.). this basis, P.J.). On this basis, the the Court
Court finds
finds that
that the
theFamily
Family Violence
Violence charges
1
2 are not coextensive are coextensive with the civil remedy. The Court Court further agrees with the People that "the agrees with
3 public's interest is is best served by getting Defendant the treatment he needs to to prevent
prevent further
further
4 family violence by and through the family violence violence deferred
deferred plea."
plea." Opp.
Opp. at 3.
5 CONCLUSION
6
For the above
above reasons,
reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion to that the to 7
8 Dismiss Due to Civil Compromise is DENIED DENIED.
9 SO ORDERED this SO ORDERED 2l81 day
this 2151 dayof
ofNovember,
November, 2023.
2023.
10 10
11 11 I Ono MARIA T. CENZON 12 12 Edee perlor Court of Guam 13 1
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20
21 SERVICE VIA
vIA EMAIL
EMAIL
I acknowledge that an electronic 22 copy of the original was e-mailed e-mailed to:
to:
23 r Ava
24 · · ·.1l~Stiff""
\\ l?¢f'5T\me:
Date: U Date: 502*/\ 25 Pr A'l\»vhi¢ 1 Cmv ""-z,,-
Deputy Clerk, sup( or Court of Guam
26
27
28 People vs. Jordon Jerome Santos Naputi, vs. Jordon Napufi, Criminal Criminal Case CMOl35-2 I Case No. CM0135-21
Decision and Order
Order re.
re. Defendant's
Defendant'sMotion
Motion for
for Civil
Civil Compromise
Page Page 7 of7
of