People v. Santos
This text of People v. Santos (People v. Santos) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Guam primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED SUPERIOR COURT OF GU/\M 1 202~ JAN -8 PM ·~: 57 2 BY:, CLERK OF~ 3
4 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 5
6 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0681-19
8 V. DECISION AND ORDER 9 Re: People 's Motion to Revoke Defendant 's Probation 10 SHAWN MICHAEL BLAS SANTOS, DOB: 06/17/1987, 11 Defendant. 12
13 This matter came before the Honorable Arthur R. Barcinas on October 5, 2023, for a
14 hearing on the People's Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation. Defendant Shawn Michael ·
15 Blas Santos ("Defendant"). was present with counsel Assistant Public Defender Zachary
16 Taimanglo. Assistant Attorney General Renaida San Nicolas appeared on behalf of the People
17 of Guam ("the People").
18 BACKGROUND
19 On August 18, 2021, Defendant pled guilty to: (1) Attempted Theft (as a 3 rd Degree
20 Felony) on Information; (2) Criminal Trespass (As a Misdemeanor) on Information; and (3)
21 Criminal Trespass (As a Misdemeanor) Charge 3. As part of his plea agreement, Defendant
22 was sentenced to five (5) years of incarceration, all but three (3) years suspended, with credit for
23 time served. Defendant also agre~d to pay plus court costs, and full restitution, in an amount to
24 1 be determined at a restitution hearing. As part of his plea agreement, Defendant also agreed to
2 be placed on supervised probation for a period of three (3) years with various conditions,
3 including to:
4 1. Report to Guam Behavioral Health and Wellness Center ("GBHWC") for intake and
5 drug/alcohol assessment, and to follow all treatment plans as may be recommended by
6 GBHWC;
7 2. Report to the Probation office once a month in person, or as ordered;
8 3. Comply with all court orders; and
9 4. Obey all federal and local laws of Guam.
10 On November 3, 2021, the Court accepted the plea agreement, sentenced the Defendant
11 accordingly, and filed the Judgment of Conviction. The Judgment of Conviction also provided
12 that failure of the Defendant to follow all conditions of his probation could result in a hearing to
13 revoke probation at which time the C9urt could impose any sentence that may have been
14 originally imposed.
15 On July 5, 2022, Probation filed a First Violation Report, advising that Defendant failed
16 to comply with probation conditions, in that he: (1) failed to report to the Probation office for
17 intake and processing after being released from the Department of Corrections on May 27,
18 2022; (2) failed to report to the Lighthouse Recovery Center; (3) failed to attend the Recovery
19 Oriented Systems of Care program; and (4) failed to inform Probation ofa change of address.
20 On September 26, 2022, Probation filed a Second Violation Report, again advising that
21 Defendant had failed to comply with probation conditions by committing new crimes resulting
22 in changes filed against Defendant in Criminal Case No. CF058 l-22. The next day, on
23 September 27, 2022, the People filed their Motion to Revoke Defendant's Probation
24 Page 2 of5 1 ("Motion"). On December 12, 2022, Defendant filed his opposition to the Motion. On October
2 5, 2023, the Court held a revocation hearing on the Motion. After hearing arguments from both
3 parties, the Court ordered that Probation verify information provided by Defendant and file an
4 Informational Report by October 10, 2023. The Court subsequently took the matter under
5 advisement.
6 Probation filed the Informational Report on October 6, 2023, indicating that Defendant
7 attempted to contact Probation once by phone on June 2, 2023, Defendant was informed to
8 report to the Probation Office on June 5, 2023, Defendant was given the direct office number to
9 Probation Officer Jim Rebujio, and Defendant acknowledged his understanding that he was to
10 come into the Probation Office, but Officer Rebujio did not receive any phone call or voicemail
11 from Defendant afterward.
12 DISCUSSION
13 9 GCA § 80.66, which governs probation revocation proceedings, provides, in relevant
14 part, that:
15 (a) At any time before the discharge of the offender or the termination of the period of suspension or probation: 16 (1) upon a showing of probable cause that an offender has 17 violated a condition of his suspension or probation, the court may summon the offender to appear before it or may issue a warrant for 18 his arrest[, and] ... (2) the court, if satisfied that the offender has inexcusably 19 failed to comply with a substantial requirement imposed as a condition of the order may revoke the suspension or probation and 20 sentence or re-sentence the offender. Violation of a condition shall not result in revocation, however, unless the court determines that 21 revocation under all the circumstances then existing will best satisfy the ends of justice and the best interests of the public. 22 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(l)-(2). (2023). 23
24 Page3 of5 1 Probation revocation is a two-step process. Guam v. Camacho, 2009 Guam 6 iJ 27. First,
2 the trial court must make a factual determination that a violation of a condition of probation
3 actually has occurred. Id. If a violation is proven, then the court must determine if the violation
4 .warrants revocation of the probation. Id. A defendant's violation of probation warrants
5 revocation where the violation upsets the intent of the probation conditions. Id. ,r 31.
6 The goal of a revocation hearing is not to decide guilt or innocence, but to determine
7 whether the defendant remains a good risk for probation. Id.; People v. Manila, 2005 Guam 6 if
8 13. The standard of proof required at a probation revocation hearing is that the evidence and the
9 facts be such as reasonably necessary to satisfy the judge that the probationer's conduct has not
10 been as required by the conditions of probation. People v. Angoco, 1998 Guam l O,r 8 The trial
11 court's decision to revoke probation must be based on credible evidence, but the defendant
12 bears the burden of showing an excuse for the failure to comply with the conditions. Camacho,
13 2009 Guam 6 iJ 30.
14 The People allege that Defendant "has failed to follow through with the terms of
15 probation, and he has done so willfully," and that Defendant has "made it apparent that he does
16 not respect the court's orders and terms of the agreement which he agreed to and sees the terms
17 of probation as optional rather than mandatory." Mot., at 2. Defendant argues that his violation
18 and subsequent return of warrant "occurred sufficiently early in his three-year probation such
19 that he may still complete his conditions." Opp., at 3. Defendant further argues that, with regard
20 to his new charges under CF0581-22, Defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence,
21 and the People's reliance on said charges as a factor should not be considered. Id.
22 After reviewing the record and hearing the arguments, the Court finds that, based on the
23 length of Defendant's inaction in meeting the terms of his probation, his failure to explain his
24 Page 4 of5 1 inability or delay in meeting said terms, and the state of his charges under CF058l-22,
2 Defendant is not sufficiently interested in his freedom so as to outweigh the state's interest in
3 insuring his rehabilitation and the public safety. Probation is a favor granted by the state, not a
4 right to which Defendant is entitled. Camacho, 2009 Guam 6 ,r 26.
5 CONCLUSION
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
People v. Santos, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-santos-superctguam-2024.