People v. Quitugua

Opinion

2U2~j~—i~ MIII: 1~ CLERK OF COURT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM

PEOPLE OF GUAM, Criminal Case No. CF0471-19 GPD Report No. 19-24266 vs.

AUSTIN JOSEPH QUITUGUA, DECISION AND ORDER DOB: 02/14/1995 (People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice) Defendant.

INTRODUCTION

This matter came before the Honorable Dana A. Gutierrez on December 15, 2020 for a

Further Proceedings hearing. Present via Zoom were Attorney Samuel S. Teker representing

Defendant Austin Joseph Quitugua (“Defendant”); Assistant Attorney General Richelle J.T.Y.

Canto representing the People of Guam; Probation Officer John Ulloa from the Probation

Services Division. Defendant was present with Attorney Teker. At the hearing, both parties

requested that the Court address the People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice (“Motion

to Dismiss”) that was filed on December 7, 2020. The Court heard from each party and took the

matter under advisement at the December 15, 2020 hearing. For the reasons set forth below, the

Court GRANTS the People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice and ORDERS the above

captioned case DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. DECISION AND ORDER (People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice) CF0471-]9; People v. Austin Joseph Quitugua

BACKGROUND

Defendant is charged with First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a First Degree

Felony) and three (3) counts of Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a First Degree

Felony). The charges stem from alleged intentional sexual conduct by Defendant towards a

minor victim under the age of fourteen between December 1, 2018 and July 27, 2019. The

People filed the Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice on December 7, 2020. At the

December 15, 2020 hearing, the People stated that the victim has relocated off-island and does

not wish to pursue charges. Defendant stated that he does not oppose the Motion, and requested

that the Court allow the Defendant to file a supplemental statement supporting the dismissal

without prejudice from the alleged victim’s mother, which the People did not oppose. The Court

granted Defendant’s request, and Defendant filed a Non-Opposition and Submission of

Document in Support of Dismissal with Prejudice (“Defendant’s Non-Opposition”) on December

16, 2020.

DISCUSSION

Pursuant to 8 G.C.A. § 80.70(a), “[t]he prosecuting attorney may with leave of court file

a dismissal of an indictment, information or complaint and the prosecution shall there upon

terminate . . . The prosecuting attorney shall file a statement of his reasons for seeking

dismissal[.]” When considering a Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice brought by the People

under 8 G.C.A. § 80.70(a), the Court adopts the “presumption that [the prosecutor] is acting in

good faith and in the proper discharge of his duties.” People of Guam v. Gutierrez, 2005 Guam

19 ¶ 51 (quoting US. v. Greater Blouse, Skirt & Neckwear Contractors Association, 228 F. Supp.

483, 486 (S.D.N.Y. 1963)).

2 DECISION AND ORDER (People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice) CF0471-19, People v. Austin Joseph Quitugua

Here, the People’s Motion requests that the Court dismiss the above-captioned case

without prejudice pursuant to 8 G.C.A. § 80.70(a) stating that “it would be in the best interest of

justice as the victim has relocated off-island and no longer wishes to pursue charges.” Mot. to

Dismiss (Dec. 7, 2020). Defendant’s supporting document signed by the alleged victim’s mother

states that the alleged victim has relocated out of Guam and requests that the Court dismiss the

charges against the Defendant. Defendant’s Non-Opposition (Dec. 16, 2020). The Court notes

that the record does not reflect any basis for finding the People’s Motion was brought in bad faith

or is emblematic of any harassment requiring judicial or statutory protection. See Gutierrez,

2005 Guam 19 ¶ 49.

Additionally, as noted above, at the December 15, 2020 hearing, both parties requested

that the Court address the People’s Motion. The People’s Motion requested dismissal without

prejudice and at the hearing, the Defendant stated that he did not oppose the Motion. Although

the Defendant later filed, with the Court’s permission and the People’s concurrence, a document

from the victim’s mother entitled, “Non-Opposition and Submission of Document in Support of

Dismissal with Prejudice,” the Court finds that the matter of dismissal with prejudice was not

before the Court at the December 15, 2020 hearing when the matter was addressed. Despite the

caption on Defendant’s filing which references dismissal with prejudice, at the hearing,

Defendant acknowledged that the dismissal is without prejudice and that the People can refile the

charges. Mi Entry, at 10:41:10 AM (Dec. 15, 2020). As Guam law generally does not

authorize “trial courts to sua sponte dismiss indictments with prejudice” when considering an 8

G.C.A. § 80.70(a) Motion, the Court finds that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate. Id. at

¶ 69.

3 DECISION AND ORDER (People’s Motion for Dismissal Without Prejudice) CF0471-19, People v. Austin Joseph Quitugua

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the People’s Motion for Dismissal and

ORDERS the above-captioned case DISMISSED WIThOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 8

G.C.A § 80.70 upon the voluntary dismissal of the People. The Court vacates any conditional

release orders and restrictions which Defendant is ordered to follow in this case.

SO ORDERED this 4th day of January, 2021.

SERY!cE VIA E-MAIL I~ a~knowIedge Ihat an electronic ~co~y of The original was e-mailed to:

Date: ti’4i.~( lime: 4 puty CI~rk,~~or Court of Guam