People v. Susuico

Opinion

F I\LED L QLERK *CTF CLERK OF ca i COURT 1 2025 SEP 2§Z'3 pJtl l: 336 -9-9 Ni=tu= S`EP 2 ,:,·unt::PlQR ;'.) st-t\.l I cnURT CQURT ._,, 3 Of GU#€¥*1 GUAM 4

5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF OF GUAM GUAM 6 ) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE CASE no. CF0490-24 NO.CF0490-24 7 7 PEOPLE OF OF GUAM, GUAM, )) Report Nos. 24-14701/24-14874/24-14884 GPD Report )) 8 vs. ) ) 9 )) DECISION & ORDER )) RE. DEFENDANT FREDDY CUEVAS DEFENDANT FREDDY CUEVAS 10 10 FREDDY CUEVAS SUSUICO, SUSUICO'S MOTION MOTION TO DISMISS DOB: 10/27/1976 ) INDICTMENT 11 ) Defendant. )) 12 ) 13 13 This matter came before matter came before the Honorable Alberto the Honorable Alberto E. Tolentino Tolentino on on June June 17, 17, 2025, 2025, for aa 14 14

15 Motion Motion Hearing. Hearing. Defendant Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico Susuico ("Defendant") was was present present with with counsel counsel 15

16 16 Attorney Heather Attorney Heather Quitugua. Attorney General Grant Olan Quitugua. Assistant Attorney Olen was present presentfor for the thePeople People of of

17 17 Guam Guam ("People"). At At this this Motion MotionHearing, Hearing, the the parties parties were were before before the the court court totoaddress address 18 18 Defendant's Motion Defendant's Motion to to Dismiss Dismiss the the Indictment, Indictment, which which was was filed tiled on April April 28, 2025. 2025. Following the Following the 19 19 hearing, the court took the hearing, the the matter matter under under advisement advisement pursuant to Supreme pursuant to Supreme Court Court of Guam Guam 20 20

21 Administrative Rule Administrative Rule 06-001, 06-001,CVR CVR 7.l(e)(6)(A) 7.1(e)(6)(A) and and CR1.1 CRl.1 of the the Local Local Rules Rules of ofthe the Superior Superior

22 Court of ofGuam. Guam. Having duly duly considered considered the the parties' briefings, briefings,oral oralarguments, arguments, and and the applicable 23 23 law, the the court court now now issues issues this thisDecision Decision and andOrder Order DENYING DENYING Defendant Defendant Freddy Freddy Cuevas 24 24 Susuico's Motion Motion to to Dismiss Dismiss Indictment. 25 25 BACKGROUND 26

27 On On July July 19, 19, 2024, the People 2024, the People charged the Defendant charged the Defendantvia via Indictment Indictmentfor for the the following following

28 28 offenses: (1) Three offenses: (1) Three Counts CountsofofCOMPLICITY COMPLICITYTO TO COMMIT COMMIT BURGLARY BURGLARY (As (Asaa2nd 2nd Degree Degree

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Defendant Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Susuico's Motion Motion to Dismiss Indictment People People v. v. Susuico, Susuico, CF0490-24 Page Pagel1 of7 Felony) with a Notice of Commission Commission of of a Felony while on Felony Release, Release; and and (2) Three Counts 1

22 of BY RECEIVING of THEFT BY RECEWING (As a 2nd Degree Felony). See generally Indictment Indictment (July (July 19, 19, 2024).

3 On October October 29, 2024, the People People subsequently subsequently filed filed a Superseding Superseding Indictment for the same 4 . . u . . offenses, but also also attaching attaching the Notice of theNotice of Commission Commlsslon of a Felony Felony while on Felony whlle on Felony Release Release to to the 5 Second ond Charge ha r ge of of THEFT F T BY RRECEIVING E W ((As aa 22nd nd DDegree egr ee FFelony). elony) See generally generally 6

7 Superseding Indictment Superseding Indictment (Oct. (Oct. 29, 2024).

8 In anticipation for Jury Selection and Trial, Trial, which which was previously scheduled for June 16, 16,

99 2025, the Defendant filed seven motions. On On January January 6, 2025, the Defendant filed his Motion to 10 10 Suppress Evidence, allegedly involuntary Evidence, including all allegedly involuntary statements statements made by the Defendant to to law 11 II enforcement; and all unrecorded (through video enforcement, video or or audio) audio) statements statements made by the Defendant to 12 12

13 Suppress (Jan. 6, 2025). law enforcement. See Mot. Suppress 2025). The The People filed its Opposition in response

14 the Motion to the MotiontotoSuppress Suppress on on January January 17, 17, 2025. See See generally Ppl.'s Opp'n generally Ppl.'s Opp'nSuppress Suppress (Jan. (Jan. 17, 17, 15 15 2025). 16 16 The Defendant later filed the following Defendant later following motions motions on onApril April28, 28, 2025 2025:: (1) (1) Defendant Defendant Freddy 17 17

Dismiss"); (2) Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion to Dismiss Indictment ("Motion to Dismiss"), 18 18

19 19 Cuevas Susuico's Motion in Limine Liming to Prohibit Defendant's Statements Statements at at Trial, Trial; (3) Defendant

20 20 Limine to Exclude Mug Shots, Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion inLimine Shots; (4) Defendant Freddy Cuevas 21 Susuico's Motion in Limine Liming to Exclude Any Any Prosecution Prosecution Expert from Testifying, Testifying; (5) Defendant 22 Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion in Limine Liming to Exclude Evidence of of Any Misconduct Committed 23

24 24 During Pretrial During Pretrial Detention Detention and and Pretrial Pretrial Release; Release, and and (6) (6) Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Susuico's

25 25 Motion in Limine Liming to Exclude All Evidence Not Discovered to Defendant Defendant by Law Enforcement Enforcement as

26 26 of April 14, ofApril 14, 2025. 27

28 28

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Defendant Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion Motion to Dismiss Indictment People People v. Susuico, Susuico, CF0490-24 Page of Page 2 of7 Despite proper service that was was effectuated for these motions in liming, limine, the People had had 1

2 filed no filed no responses as of responses as of the the Motion Motion Hearing, which which was previously scheduled scheduled for May 28, 28, 2025. 2025. 3 As As a sanction for for the thePeople's People's failure to timely file fileresponses responses to the Defendant's Defendant's motionsin in limine, 4 the court barred barred any any oral oral argument argumentform form the the People People at the the continued continued Motion Motion Hearing scheduled scheduled 5 for June 17,2025. June 17, 2025.See SeeMot. Mot.Hr'g Hr'g Mins. at 10:29:46 10:29:46 ---32:04AM 32:04AM (May (May 28, 2025). 2025). However, the 6

court permitted the the People People leave of ofcourt court to file file late late responses responses to the Defendant's motions no later 7

8 than close close of ofbusiness businesson onJune June 4, 4, 2025. ld.11 2025. Id. 9 In In accordance with the accordance with the court's court's new new deadline, deadline, the the People People filed filed the following following responses responses to 10 the Defendant's motions mentioned Defendant's motions mentioned above: above: (1) (1) People's People's Opposition Opposition to to Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motion to 11 Dismiss Indictment Indictment("People's ("People's Opposition"); Opposition"), (2) People's People's Opposition Opposition to to Defendant's Defendant's Motion in 12 12

13 Limine to Prohibit Use of of Defendant's Defendant's Statements Statements atat Trial; Trial, (3) (3) People's People's Non-Opposition Non-Opposition to

14 14 Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Mug Shots, Shots; (4) People's People's Opposition Opposition to to Defendant's Defendant's 15 15 Motion Motion in Limine to Exclude Exclude Any Prosecution Expertfrom Prosecution Expert fromTestifying; Testifying, (5) (5) People's People's Opposition Opposition 16 16 to Defendant's Motion in Liming Limine to Exclude Exclude Evidence of of Any AnyMisconduct Misconduct Committed Committed During During 17 Pretrial Detention and Pretrial Detention andPretrial PretrialRelease; Release,and and(6) (6) People's People's Opposition to to Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motion in 18 18

19 19 Limine to Exclude Exclude All Evidence Evidence Not Not Discovered Discovered to to Defendant Defendant by Law Enforcement as as of of April April

20 14,2025. 14, 2025. 21

24 24 11 If If aa motion motion is is untimely untimely filed, filed, the the court court may may allow allow the the filing filing of of motions motions beyond the time limit previously set by the 25 25 court. court. SeeSee 8 8 GCA GCA §§ 65.45 65.45 ("Failure by a party to raise defenses or ("Failure by a party to raise defenses or objections objections or make requests to make or to which must requests which must be be made prior to made prior to trial, at the trial, at the time time set set by by the the court court pursuant pursuant to§ 65.15, or to § 65.15, prior to or prior to any any extension thereof made extension thereof made by by the the 26 26 court, shall constitute constitute aa waiver waiver thereof, thereof, but but the the court court for for cause cause shown may grant grant relief relief from the waiver."). Despite Despite People's failure the People's failure to to timely timely file file responses responses inin this case, the court court still has an obligation to analyze the merits of the 27 27 issue before it. In Petition a/Quitugua of Quitugua v. v. Flores, Flores, the Supreme Court Court ofof Guam Guam held held that that "the "the failure failure to file file a written written opposition, the filing of a notice non-opposition, non-opposition, or or the disregard ofof untimely filed papers" does not relieve the lower 28 28 court court of of its obligation to consider the merits of a motion motion before rendering its decision. Petition ofQuitugua Quitugua v. Flores, v. Flores, 2004 Guam 19 ,r,r W 27-28. 27-28.

Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Defendant Defendant Freddy Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion Cuevas Susuico's Motion to to Dismiss Indictment Dismiss Indictment People v. Susuico, Susuico, CF0490-24 CF0490-24 Page Page 3 of7 In his Motion Motion to Dismiss, the the Defendant Defendant argues argues that that dismissal dismissal of of this this case case is is appropriate appropriate l 22 based on statements made by a defendant named Alex Taimanglo in Criminal Case No. CF0501-

3 24. See See Def. Def.'s Mot. Dismiss, Ex. C (Apr. 28, 2025). 2025). Specifically, Specifically, Taimanglo Tairnanglo stated the the following: following: 4 Although Freddy Freddy Cuevas Cuevas Susuico Susuico was implicated implicated in my statements statements on this case case 5 CF50l-24, CF501-24, II Alex Alex Alberto Alberto Taimanglo Taimanglo would would like like to to address address that that Freddy Freddy Cuevas Cuevas Susuico had no involvement on this matter. 6

7 Id. Prior Priorto to Taimanglo's Taimanglo'sstatement statementfiled filed in inCF0501-24, CF0501-24, itit is is noteworthy noteworthy that that an informant named 7

88 the Defendant as a suspect in the burglaries within the police reports in this case. See Magistrate's 9 Compl., Aft. Con 12, 2024). Because of this, Guam Police Aff. (July 12, Police officers officers executed executed a search search warrant 10 10 and apprehended the the Defendant. Defendant. Id. Id. 11 11 In its Opposition, the People stated that the Defendant "has failed to show that there is a 12

13 13 defect in the defect in under 88 GCA indictment" under the indictment" GCA §§ 65.15(b). 65.15(b). Pp1.'s Opp'n (June Ppl.'s Opp'n (June 4, 4, 2025). The People 2025). The People also also

14 believe that the Defendant "appears to argue that the People cannot prove the charges against the

15 15 Defendant beyond a reasonable doubt." Id. Id. at 4. 4. In believing this, the People argue that this is a 16 16 factual matter for the jury to determine, not the court. Id. Id. 17

On June June 17, 17, 2025, 2025, all parties parties were present before the court to address address the Defendant's 18 18

19 19 Motion Hearing, pending motions in this case. At the Motion Hearing, the the Defendant Defendant clarifies clarifies that dismissal is

20 20 appropriate under 88 GCA appropriate under GCA §§ 65 65.15 .15 as "a defect as "a the case bringing the in bringing defect in case in in the the first first instance" instance" as as the the 21 People can only bring case with a good faith basis for believing that it can be proven beyond a 22 reasonable doubt. See reasonable doubt. See Mot. Mot. Hr'g Hr'g Mims. at 3:08:58 Mins. at 3:08:58 -- 09:26PM (June (June 17, 17, 2025). Noting that the 23

24 People have had this information since January, the Defendant argued that there was a defect in 24

25 25 the institution of this case, because because this this case case should should not not have have been been brought brought in in light light ofTaimanglo's of Taimanglo's

26 statement. Id. at 3: 11 11:23 :23- -14:05PM. 14:05PM.After Afterhearing hearingthe theparties' parties' arguments arguments on all motions, the court 27 . . . . took the Motion to Dlsmlss Motlon to Dismiss under under advlsement. advisement. 28

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Defendant Defendant Freddy Cuevas Cuevas Susuico's Susuico's Motion Motion to to Dismiss Dismiss Indictment Indictment People People v. Susuico, Susuico, CF0490-24 CF0490-24 Page 4 of of7 DISCUSSION 1

2 Both Both parties parties provide provide 88 GCA GCA §§ 65.15 65.15 as authority on as authority on the the issue of dismissal, issue of dismissal, which which states: states:

3 Any defense, objection objection or or request which isis capable capable of of determination without the trial of trial of the the general issue issue may be raised before trial trial by by motion. motion. Motions Motions may be 4 written or oral at the discretion of the the judge. judge. The following shall shall be raised prior to 5 trial: trial:

6 Defenses and (a) Defenses and objections objections based based on on defects defects in in the the institution of the prosecution, institution of prosecution; (b) Defenses Defenses and objections objections based on defects defects in thethe indictment, indictment, information information or or 7 complaint complaint (other other than that it fails to show jurisdiction in the court or to charge fails to 8 an offense offense which whichobi sectionsshall objections shallbebenoticed noticed byby the the court court at at any any time time during the pendency ofof the proceedings), proceedings); 9 (c) Motions Motions to suppress evidence; evidence, 10 10 (d) ( Requests Requests for for discovery pursuant to discovery pursuant to Chapter Chapter 7070 ((commencing commencing withwith §§ 70.1 70.l0), 0); or or (e) (e) Requests Requests for for aa severance severance of of charges charges oror defendants defendants pursuant pursuant to to§ 65.35. 65.35. 11 88 GCA GCA §§ 65.15. 65.15. 12 12

13 This This Guam statute was originally statute was originally sourced sourced from from Rule Rule 12(b)(3) l2(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of of

14 14 Procedure 2Therefore, Criminal Procedure. Therefore,this this court court may may use usefederal federal authority authority to to interpret interpret and guide the 15 15 application application of of 88 GCA GCA §§ 65.15 65 .15 to to this this case. case. 16 16

17 17

18 18

2 19 2 Federal Federal Rule Rule of of Criminal Criminal Procedure Procedure 12(b)(3) l2(b)(3) states that "[t]he "[t]he following defenses, objections, and requests must be raised by pretrial motion if the basis basis for for the motion motion is then then reasonably available and thethe motion motion can be 20 determined without a trial on the merits:" (A) a defect in instituting thethe prosecution, prosecution, including: 21 (i) improper venue; venue, (ii) preindictment delay; (ii) preindictment 22 22 (iii) (iii) a violation of the constitutional right to a speedy trial, trial; (iv) selective or vindictive prosecution; prosecution, and 23 23 (v) an error in the the grand-jury grand-jury proceeding or preliminary hearing; hearing, (B) a defect in the indictment or information, including: 24 24 (i) joining joining two oror more more offenses offenses in in the the same same count count (duplicity) (duplicity);, (ii) charging the same offense in more than one count (multiplicity), (ii) charging (multiplicity); 25 25 (iii) (iii) lack of specificity; (iv) improper joinder; jointer; and 26 26 (v) failure to state an offense; offense, (C) suppression of evidence; evidence, 27 27 (D) severance of of charges or or defendants under Rule 14, 14; and (E) discovery under Rule 16. 28 Fed. R. Crum. p. 12(b)(3). Crim. P.

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Susuico's Motion Motion to Dismiss Indictment People People v. v. Susuieo, Susuico, CF0490-24 Page Page 5 of7 The court does not dispute dispute the thetimeliness timelinessof of the the Defendant's Defendant's Motion Motion to Dismiss before 1

2 However, the trial. However, the issue issue before the court is whether whetherthe thePeople's People's ability to prove prove this this case beyond

3 a reasonable at trial reasonable doubt at trial constitutes as as a defect defect in in the institution institution of ofthe the prosecution prosecutionpursuant pursuant to 4 8 8 GCA GCA §§65.15(a).When 65.15(a).When reviewing reviewing Federal Federal Rule Rule of ofCriminal Criminal Procedure Procedure 12(b), 12(b), aa defect defect in in 5 institution institution aa prosecution includes: includes:(i) (i) improper improper venue; venue;(ii) (ii) preindictment preindictmentdelay; delay;(iii) (iii) aa violation violation of of 6

7 the constitutional constitutionalright rightto to aaspeedy speedytrial; trial,(iv) (iv) selective selective or or vindictive vindictiveprosecution, prosecution; and and (V) (v) an an error 7

8 8 in the the grand-jury proceedingororpreliminary grand-jury proceeding preliminaryhearing. hearing. Fed. Fed. R. R.Crim. Crim.P. P.12(b)(3)(A)(i)-(v). l2(b)(3)(A)(i)-(v).

9 9 However, However, none none of ofthese these defects defects were were proven proven to to exist exist in in this this matter. matter. 10 10 In United In United States States v. v. Nukida, Nukida, the United States Court of Appeals reversed States Court reversed a California California 11 District Court decision to grant aa defendant's District defendant's Rule Rule 12(b) motion See generally United motion to dismiss. See 12 12

13 13 States States v. v. Nukida, Nukida, 88 F.3d 665, 665, 669 669 (9th Cir. 1993). 1993). On On appeal, appeal, "[t]he "[t]he government government argued argued that that

14 14 whether the contaminated medications medications affected affected interstate commerce constitutes an element element of the

15 15 charged charged offense which should be decided should be decided by by the the jury." jury." Nukida, 88 F.3d at 668. 668. Ultimately, the the 16 16 Court of of Appeals Appeals agreed agreed with with the the government, government, holding holding that that the the defendant's 12(b) motion to defendant's 12(b) 17 17 18 dismiss "amountedtoto a premature dismiss "amounted challenge to premature challenge to the the sufficiency sufficiency of of the the government's government's 18

19 19 evidence tending to prove a material material element elementof of the the offense." offense." Id. at at 669-670.

20 Like the the defendant defendant in Nukida, Nukida, Defendant Susuico challenges Defendant Susuico challengesthe the sufficiency sufficiency of of the the 21 People's People'sevidence evidenceby byarguing arguingthat that itit cannot cannot overcome overcome its its burden burden of proving the the charged offenses 22 beyond aa reasonable reasonable doubt doubt based based on the lack of of evidence evidence and and Taimanglo's Taimanglo's statement. statement. While 23

24 Taimanglo's statement Taimanglo's statement is is something something that that could aid the Defendant's Defendant's case case at at trial, the the court court agrees 24

25 25 with People that with the People that whether whether the the Defendant Defendant was was involved involvedininthe theevents eventsbetween betweenJune June23 23 and and July 26 26 7 of of 2024 2024 is something for for aa jury to to consider consider as as the trier of offact. fact. For Forthis this reason, reason, the the court court denies 27 . . . the Defendant's the Defendant's Motion Motlon to Dismiss. Dlsmlss. 28

Decision Decision&&Order OrderRe. Re. Defendant Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Susuico's Motion Motion to to Dismiss Dismiss Indictment Indictment Peoplev. People v. Susuico, CF0490-24 CF0490-24 Page Page 6 of 6 of7 CONCLUSION

2 For reasons stated above, the court hereby DENIES Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's

3- Motion to Dismiss Indictment. 4

6 SEP 09 2025 SO ORDERED this ------'---------- 7

11 HONORABLE ALBERTO E. TOLENTINO Judge, Superior Court bf Guam 12

15 16

23 SER\fHCrE VUA. IE=MAOI.L I acknowledge that an electronic 24 copy ofthe original was e-mailed to:

25 · Prt;, , H. Ou; 7e. 26 Date: q fq ,~ime: {r !cf{C4v,. Cn,vz.,....-- 27

Decision & Order Re. Defendant Freddy Cuevas Susuico's Motion to Dismiss Indictment People v. Susuico, CF0490-24 Page 7 of7