People v. Reselap
Opinion
1 SUPERIOR COUIT OF GUAM
2919MAR•—8 AMI~DO
CLERK OF COW T
4
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7
8 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0079-19 9 vs.
10 DECISION AND ORDER 11 TAITANO RESELAP, 12 Defendant.
13
14 INTRODUCTION 15 This matter came before the Honorable Vernon P. Perez on March 5, 2019, for hearing 16 on Defendant Taitano Reselap’s (“Defendant”) Ex Parte Motion and Application for Bail 17 Redetermination Hearing Under 8 G.C.A. § 45.50(a) for Release on Personal Recognizance 18 (“Motion for Bail Redetermination”). Defendant was present with counsel Assistant Public 19 Defender Richard S. Dirkx, and Assistant Attorney General Brendlynn 0. Joseph was present 20 on behalf of the People of Guam (“the Government”). In accord with its ruling from the bench 21 on March 5, 2019, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order DENYING 22 Defendant’s Motion for Bail Redetermination. V
23 V V BACKGROUND 24 On February 19, 2019, Defendant was indicted with the following charges~ (1) Family 25 Violence (As a Third Degree Felony), with attached Special Allegation: Possession or Use of a 26 Deadly Weapon in the Commission of a Felony; (2) Terrorizing (As a Third Degree Felony), 27 with attached Special Allegation: Possession or Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission of 28
People v. Reselap Case No. CF0079-19 Decision and Order
,Page 1 of 5
1 a Felony; (3) Family Violence (As a Misdemeanor); and (4) Harassment (As a Petty 2 Misdemeanor). (Indictment, Feb. 19, 2019). These charges stem from allegations that 3 Defendant got upset at his girlfriend, slapped her face four times, punched her back, and 4 threatened to kill her while holding a knife. (Decl. of Brendlynn 0. Joseph, Magistrate’s 5 Compl., Feb. 9, 2019). Defendant subsequently chased after her when she ran out of the 6 apartment. Id. 7 On February 18, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion and Application for Bail 8 Redetermination Hearing under 8 G.C.A. § 40.50 for Release on Personal Recognizance. 9 Defendant is confined pending the posting of $5,000 cash bail. See Commitment Order, Feb. 9, 10 2019. The Government did not file a written response to the motion, but orally opposed 11 Defendant’s release on personal recognizance without third-party custodians. 12 On February 20, 2019, at Arraignment, Defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial. 13 Jury Selection and Trial is currently set for April 3, 2019. 14 DISCUSSION 15 Defendant moves the Court to release him on personal recognizance as he does not have 16 the means to pay the five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) cash bail. See generally, Mot. Bail 17 Redetermination, Feb. 18, 2019. 18 Under Guam law, the Court must “order the person charged to be released on 19 recognizance, unless the judge determines, in his discretion, on the basis of available 20 information, that such a release will not reasonably assure the appearance of the person as 21 required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community.” 8 G.C.A. § 22 40.15(b). Factors for the Court to consider in determining whether Defendant presents a 23 substantial risk of nonappearance or is a danger to the safety of any other person or the 24 community include: 25 (1) the nature of the offense charged, the apparent possibility of conviction and the likely sentence;
26 (2) the history and characteristics of the person charged, including: 27 (i) length of his/her residence on Guam; 28 (ii) his/her employment status and history, and financial condition;
People v. Reselcip Case No. CF0079-19 Decision and Order
Page2of5
1 (iii) his/her family ties and relationships;
(iv) his/her reputation, character and mental and physical condition;
2 (v) his/her prior criminal record, if any, including any record of prior 3 release on recognizance Or on bail;
(vi) his/her history relating to drug or alcohol abuse; (vii) the identity of the reasonable members of the community who will 5 vouch for his/her reliability;
(viii) whether at the time of the current offense or arrest, he/she was on 6 probation, on parole or on other release pending trial, sentencing, 7 appeal or completion of sentence of an offense under Federal, state 8 or local law; and (ix) his/her history of compliance with other court orders;
9 (3) the nature and seriousness of the danger the person would pose to the 10 community or to any individual member thereof if released; and (4) any other factors which bear on the risk of willful failure to appear or the 11 danger the person would pose to the community or to any individual member 12 thereof if released. 13 8 G.C.A. § 40.15(c). 14 If the Court finds that release on his or her own recognizance would not assure a 15 defendant’s appearance or would present a danger to any other person or the community, the 16 Court may still permit release subject to certain conditions under 8 G.C.A. § 40.20. These 17 conditions include:
(a) placement of the person in the custody of a designated person or organization 18 agreeing to supervise him and to assist him in appearing in Court;
(b) placement of restrictions on the activities, movements, associations and
20 (c) residence execution of
ofthe person;
a bond in an amount specified by the judge; such bond in the 21 discretion of the judge to be either unsecured or secured in whole or in part by 22 the deposit of cash or other property, or by the obligation of qualified sureties;
(d) release of the person during working hours, but with the condition that he 23 return to custody at specific times; or 24 (e) any other condition reasonably necessary to assure appearance as required and the safety of any other person and the community.
25 8 G.C.A. § 40.20. Under section 40.20, the least onerous conditions shall be imposed to ensure 26 Defendant’s appearance as required and the safety of any other person and the community.
27 “Determinations as to bail conditions and amounts are not to be driven by the goal of keeping 28
People v. Reselap Case No. CF0079-19 Decision and Order 1 the accused incarcerated, but should rather be reached in consideration of the only authorized 2 interests, to wit, ensuring the appearance of the accused and the safety of others.” People v. 3 Song, 2011 Guam 19 ¶ 11. 4 In support of his motion, Defendant offers that he has lived on Guam for the past 23 5 years, is employed at an unknown construction company, has three dependents, and has closed 6 his prior cases. (Mot. at 2-3). At the hearing, Defendant indicated he would live with his sister 7 if released. 8 Upon consideration of the 8 G.C.A. § 40.15 factors, the Court is greatly concerned with 9 the safety of the community and whether Defendant will appear in court when required. The 10 Court recognizes the very serious nature of the offenses charged, along with the potential 11 sentence Defendant would face should he be convicted of the charges. Defendant is accused of 12 slapping, punching, and using a knife to threaten the alleged victim. Defendant’s felony charges 13 include Family Violence (As a Third Degree Felony) and Terrorizing (As a Third Degree 14 Felony), each of which includes an attached Special Allegation: Possession or Use of a Deadly 15 Weapon in the Commission of a Felony. Defendant faces a range of five (5) to twenty-five (25) 16 years of imprisonment for each special allegation, as well as a range of zero to five years for 17 both third degree felony offenses. Such a lengthy potential sentence would give anyone so 18 accused considerable incentive to avoid future court hearings in the matter. 19 Thus, upon the Court’s review, Defendant’s release only on personal recognizance does 20 not sufficiently allay the Court’s concerns regarding the safety of the community or Defendant’s 21 further appearance in court. This decision, however, does not preclude Defendant from 22 requesting release with proposed third-party custodians in the future. 23 II •24 / 25 / 26 / 27 / 28 II
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Reselap (People v. Reselap) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.