People v. San Nicolas

• Court: Superior Court of Guam
• Decided: February 3, 2012
• Docket: CF0490-10
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

, 1 2012 FEB - 3 PH 2: 5 2

3 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM . LEah Gr' GaUR n\', /i/'v 1 J, ~(f\ _r,"~ '-"-;S>""?L.<"'''~~ 4

5 PEOPLE OF GUAM ) CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF-0490-10 ) 6 ) ) 7 vs. ) DECISION AND ORDER ) 8 ) ) 9 ) ALVIN GERARD SAN NICOLAS, ) 10 ) Defendant. ) 11 ) ) 12

l3 INTRODUCTION 14 On February 2, 2012, this Court raised the issue in the above captioned case, of a 15 potentially defective indictment due to the fact that the indictment's First and Second Charges 16

17 (First and Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct, 9 GCA § 25.15 and 9 GCA § 25.25) failed

18 to state that the actor is either a member of the same household as the victim, the actor is related

19 to the victim by blood or affinity to the fourth degree to the victim, or the actor is in a position 20 of authority over the victim and used this authority to coerce the victim to submit. 21 DISCUSSION 22

23 "It is a cardinal principal of our criminal law that an indictment is sufficient which

24 apprises a defendant of the crime with which he is charged so as to enable him to prepare his 25 defense and to plead judgment of acquittal or conviction as a plea to a subsequent prosecution 26 for the same offense." People v. Jones, 2006 Guam 13 ~ 12 (citing Portnoy v. United States, 316 27 F.2d 486, 488 (1 st Cir. 1963). It is also well established that an indictment "should be read in its 28

People of Guam v, San Nicolas (CF490-1O) entirety, construed according to common sense, and interpreted to include facts which are 1 th 2 necessarily implied." Id. (citing U.S. v. Givens, 767 F.2d 574, 584 (9 Cir. 1985). Guam law is

3 in accordance with this view, holding an indictment to be sufficient where it contains the 4 elements of the crime alleged, adequately informs the defendant of the crime to allow him to 5 defend against the charges, and is stated with sufficient clarity to bar subsequent prosecution of 6 the same offense. Id. 7

8 Generally, an indictment which tracks the words of the statute charging the offense is

9 sufficient as long as the words unambiguously set forth all the elements of the offense. See 10 Jones. In the instant case, the prosecution admits that the indictment does not contain an 11 element of the crime charged. This case is different from Jones because the government in that 12 case did not exclude any of the essential elements. The indictment at issue in Jones explicitly 13

14 included all essential elements, and while the indictment did not explicitly track the statute, it

15 included other words or facts to support all the elements provided in the statute. 16 Amendments to indictments are governed by 8 GCA § 55.20 of the Guam Criminal 17 Procedure Code. An indictment is allowed to be amended "upon application of the prosecuting 18

19 attorney at any time before the verdict...if substantial rights of the defendant are not

20 prejudiced." See People v. Diaz, 2007 Guam 3 ~15 (citing 8 GCA § 55.20 21 First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct pursuant to 9 GCA 25.15(a)(2) provides that a 22 person is guilty of CSC in the first degree ifhe or she engages in sexual penetration with the 23 victim and if any of the following circumstances exist: 24 (2) the victim is at least fourteen (14) but less than sixteen (16) years of age and 25 the actor is a member of the same household as the victim, the actor is related to the victim by blood or affinity to the fourth degree to the victim, or the actor is in 26 a position of authority over the victim and used this authority to coerce the victim to submit. 27 9 GCA § 25.15 (a)(2). 28

People of Guam v. San Nicolas (CF490-1O) 1 Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct pursuant to 9 GCA 25.20(a)(2) provides that a

2 person is guilty in the second degree if he or she engages in sexual penetration with another

3 person and if any of the following circumstances exist:

4 that other person is at least fourteen (14) but less than sixteen (16) years of age and 5 the actor is a member of the same household as the victim, or is related by blood or affinity to the fourth degree to the victim, or is in a position of authority over the 6 victim and the actor used this authority to coerce the victim to submit. 7 9 GCA § 25.20 (a)(2). 8 In the present case, the Government's current indictment fails to allege that the actor is a

9 member of the same household as the victim, or is related by blood or affinity to the fourth

10 degree to the victim, or is in a position of authority over the victim and the actor used this

11 authority to coerce the victim to submit. 12 Allowing the Government to amend the indictment at this time to add one ofthe above l3

14 elements to both First Degree CSC (which includes 15 counts) and Second Degree CSC does not

15 charge a new offense or prejudice the defendant. See 8 GCA 55.20; People v. Diaz, 2007 Guam 16 3 ~15; People v. Salas, 2000 Guam 2 ~13; People v. Ouidachay, 1983 WL 29954 *4 (D.Guam 17 App.Div). But before the Court allows an amendment, the Court is concerned as to whether the 18 Grand Jury received testimony to support the charges that the actor is a member of the same 19

20 household as the victim, or is related by blood or affinity to the fourth degree to the victim, or is

21 in a position of authority over the victim and the actor used this authority to coerce the victim to 22 submit. Therefore, the Court requests the Government to produce information that it presented 23 to the Grand Jury facts pointing to the additional element required by statute. 24

25 For these reasons, the Court hereby Orders the Government to amend the indictment in

26 the above captioned case in order to be consistent with requisite elements of the charges therein. 27

People of Guam v. San Nicolas (CF490-1O) CONCLUSION 1

2 By a preponderance of the evidence and based on the foregoing reasons, the Court

3 hereby orders the Government amend the indictment in the above captioned case. 4

_7_ day Of _ _1_~ 5

6 SO ORDERED this __' _,2012. 7

10 HONORABLE AN IT A A. SUKOLA 11 Judge, Superior Court of Guam 12

25 nf,wby th,jt :he ~I)ft:,qo;nq ,1] ~rue conect (or, -,nSH1~ ,file in thp off! \)j \11 26 clerk of ti: 'l ,y-'f)0i '>_ ~ of Gua

27 Deputy Clerk, Superior CouI'I of ~ 28

People of Guam v. San Nicolas (CF490-1O)