People v. Reyes

Superior Court of Guam·Decided March 22, 2024·No. CF0474-17·Unknown

Opinion

Fi LED SUPERIOR COURT O•F Gi..,_,,!t-~.il l.Pll

1 202~ HliR 22 PM I: 2,i 2 CLERK OF COURT 3 (} 4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 5 6 PEOPLE OF GUAM, Criminal Case No. CF0474-17 GPD Report No. 17-22645 7 v. DECISION AND ORDER 8 PETER PANGELINAN REYES, GRANTING 9 DOB: 03/21/1978 PEOPLE'S MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT'S PROBATION 10 Defendant.

12 INTRODUCTION 13 This matter came before the Honorable Alberto C. Lamorena, III on February 29, 2024 for 14 a Revocation Hearing in the above-captioned matter related to Peter Pangelinan Reyes's 15 ("Defendant's") failure to abide by his probationary terms. Defendant was represented by Assistant 16 17 ublic Defender Renita Taimanao. The People of Guam were represented by Assistant Attorney

18 General Grant Olan. Having duly considered the Parties' briefs, oral arguments, and the applicable 19 aw, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order Granting Revocation of Probation. 20 BACKGROUND 21 On May 13, 2022, Defendant pled guilty to Manufacturing a Schedule I Controlled 22 st 23 Substance (as a 1 Degree Felony). See Judgment of Conviction (Jun. 27,-2022). A judgment was 24 entered imposing the following relevant conditions of probation:

25 • MANDATORY REPORTING: Upon release from the Department of 26 Corrections, Defendant shall report to the Adult Probation Office for intake and 27 processing within forty-eight (48) hours of being released. 28

Decision and Order Granting People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation CF04 74-17, People of Guam v. Peter Pangelinan Reyes Page 1 of4 1 • MANDATORY REPORTING: Defendant shall report to the Adult Probation 2 Office three (3) times per week in person, or as ordered by the Court or the

3 Probation Office.

5 The following month, a Violation Report was filed indicating that Defendant had failed to

6 eport to the Adult Probation Office for intake and processing within forty-eight (48) hours of being

7 eleased. See Violation Report (Jun. 24, 2022). In fact, Defendant had failed to report to the Adult

8 robation Office even once during the first six weeks of his probationary term. Id.

9 On January 9, 2023, another Violation Report was filed indicating that Defendant had failed

10 o report to the Adult Probation Office for several weeks following his latest release from the

11 epartment of Corrections. See Violation Report (Jan. 9, 2023).

12 On May 31, 2023, another Violation Report was filed indicating that, yet again, Defendant had

13 failed to report to the Adult Probation Office for several weeks following his latest release from the 14 epartment of Corrections. See Violation Report (May 31, 2023 ).

15 On June 2, 2023, the People filed their Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation ("Motion").

16 he People base their request on Defendant's repeated failures to report to the Adult Probation 17 Office since entering probation. See Motion (Jun. 2, 2023). Opposing the Motion, Defendant 18 claims revocation is premature because he has ample time to complete his remaining probationary 19 erms and requirements. See Opposition to Motion (Aug. 31, 2023). 20

21 On February 29, 2024, the Court held a Revocation Hearing and subsequently took the

22 atter under advisement. See Minute Entry (Feb. 29, 2024). 23 DISCUSSION 24 Guam law specifies the procedures that the Court must follow for revocation of probation. 25 he relevant statute, in its entirety, states as follows: 26 27 [T]he court, if satisfied that the offender has inexcusably failed to comply with a substantial requirement imposed as a condition of the order may revoke the 28 suspension or probation and sentence or re-sentence the offender. Violation of a condition shall not result in revocation, however, unless the court determines that

Decision and Order Granting People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation CF04 74-17, People of Guam v. Peter Pangelinan Reyes Page 2 of4 1 revocation under all the circumstances then existing will best satisfy the ends of justice and the best interests of the public. 2 3 See 9 G.C.A. § 80.66(a)(2) (1980).

4 The process for revoking an offender's probation has been further explained by the Guam

5 Supreme Court as follows: 6 Probation revocation is a two-step process. First, the trial court must make a factual 7 determination that a violation of probation actually has occurred. If a violation is proven, then the Court must determine if the violation warrants revocation of the 8 probation. 9 See People of Guam v. Camacho, 2009 Guam 6 ,i 27 (internal citations omitted). To revoke a

10 defendant's probation, evidence and facts presented to the Court must be "reasonably necessary to 11 satisfy the judge that the probationer's conduct has not been as required by the conditions of 12

13 robation." Id. at ,i 30 (citing People v. Angoco, 1998 Guam 10).

14 The Court also cannot order revocation unless the offender is provided with written notice

15 of grounds for revocation of probation. See 9 G.C.A. § 80.68(a). At the hearing, the offender shall 16 "have the right to hear and controvert the evidence against him, to offer evidence in his defense and 17 o be represented by counsel." Id. Should the Court revoke an offender's probation, "it may impose 18 on the offender any sentence that might have been imposed originally for the crime of which he 19

20 as convicted." See 9 G.C.A. § 80.66(b).

21 It remains undisputed that Defendant violated his probation conditions and that there is

22 robable cause to support the violations. Defendant repeatedly failed to timely report to the Adult 23 robation Office and these failures continued for the better part of a year. 24 Having found that Defendant was in violation of his probation requirements, the next 25 question the Court must resolve is whether "revocation under all the circumstances ... will best 26 27 satisfy the ends of justice and the best interests of the public." See 9 G.C.A. § 80.66(a)(2).

Decision and Order Granting People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation CF0474-17, People of Guam v. Peter Pangelinan Reyes Page 3 of 4 1 Based on a review of the record, it is clear that Defendant has exhausted the trust of the

2 Court by violating his probationary conditions. Defendant's violations occurred almost 3 ·mmediately upon entering probation, as he failed to even report to the Adult Probation Office for 4 is initial intake/scheduling. Defendant continued to violate his mandatory reporting conditions, 5 eceiving multiple Violation Reports for the same repeated conduct. This suggests Defendant was 6 7 ever serious about following his probation conditions, and will not follow them now if given

8 another chance. 9 Were probation continued, it appears unlikely that any significant progress would be made 10 ·n positively altering Defendant's behavior and ensuring compliance with the Court's orders. 11 herefore, the Court finds that revocation is in the public's best interest and satisfies the ends of 12 ·ustice. See 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2). 13

14 CONCLUSION

15 For the reasons stated above, the Court hereby REVOKES the Defendant's probation in the 16 above-captioned matter. The Defendant is hereby SENTENCED to three (3) years incarceration 17 at the Department of Corrections, Mangilao with credit for time served. After the completion of 18 he Defendant's sentence the Court shall close the above-captioned case. 19

20 ~

22 21 IT IS SO ORDERED this March '- 20;

23 5\ER\liCE \!IA EMAIL 24 I acKnowleoge that an electronic . copy ol \he original was e-mailed to. -~ ,_. ·---- '~:.· I -. HONORABLE ;\LB~~o/c: LAMORENA III 25 A~··,~~ Presiding Judge, Su.Pceri!>

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI