~.> .
g ' gig
cL§§€:§< Q@l_:~~
1 2n25 F5*a17 2025 FEB Ev PF?
PM 1=:a0
I: O
2
3 go." 'iaéé
4
5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF
OF GUAM
GUAM
6 ) CRIMINAL
CRIMINAL CASE
CASE NO.
NO. CF0177-14
CF0177-14
7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, GUAM, )) GPD Report Report No.
No. 13-16876
13-16876
))
8 vs. )) 9 ) ))
10 10 LYNDA LYNDA SABLAN SABLAN TAITAGUE, ))
aka Olympia Sablan Taisacan )
11 11 aka Oli Taisacan )
aka Olmpia Olimpia Sablan
Sablan Taisacan
)) DECISION
DECISION & ORDER
12 12 aka Lynda Lynda Taitague
) RE. DEFENDANT'S
DEFENDANT'S MOTION
MOTION TO
aka Olmpia OlimpiaSablan
Sablan Oly
Oly
)) RECONSIDER REVOCATION REVOCATION AND
13 1 REDUCTION REDUCTION OF SENTENCE
aka Oly Taisacan ))
14 aka Olympia Sablan Taisagan )
aka Jane Doe ))
15 15 DOB: DOB: 09/13/1978 09/13/1978 or
or 05/08/1978
05/08/1978
)
16 16 or 08/08/1978 )) )
17 17 Defendant.
))
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ )w 18 18
19 19 This matter came came before
before the
the Honorable
Honorable Alberto
Alberto E. Tolentino
Tolentino on
on April
April26,
26, 2024,
2024, through
through
20 20 a motion.
motion. Through Through her
her counsel
counsel Public
Public Defender
Defender Stephen
Stephen Hattori,
Hattori, Defendant
Defendant Lynda
Lynda Sablan
Sablan
21 ("Defendant") filed
Taitague ("Defendant") filedaaMotion MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction of
of Sentence. No
Sentence. No
22 22 responsive pleadings were Hled filed by the People of
of Guam
Guam ("People").
("People"). The court
court did
did not ind it
not find
23 23
24 24 necessary to hear hear oral
oral arguments on the Defendant's Motion. Having Defendant's Motion. Having duly considered considered the
25 25 Defendant's Defendant's Motion and and the applicable
applicable law, the
the court
court now
now issues
issues this
this Decision
Decision and
and Order
Order
26' 26.
GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART the Defendant's Motion Motion to
to Reconsider
Reconsider
27 27 Revocation Revocation and and Reduction of Sentence.
28 28
Decision Decision && Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People v. Taitague, CF0177-14 v. Taitague, CF0177-14
Page Page 11 of8
of 8
BACKGROUND
1
2 On August August 10,
10, 2014,
2014, the
the Defendant was charged Defendant was charged via via Indictment
Indictmentfor
for the
the offense
offense of
3 POSSESSION OF A SCHEDULE II CONTROLLED CONTROLLEDSUBSTANCE
SUBSTANCE(As
(Asaa3rd
3rd Degree
Degree Felony).
4 . . . .
See Indictment (Aug. See IndIctment 10, 2014).
(Aug. 10, 2014). Whlle
While on
on pre-trlal
pre-trial release,
release, the Adult
Adult Probatlon
Probation Office
5 ("Probation")filed ("Probation") filednine nineviolations
violationsagainst
againstthe
the Defendant
Defendant for
for violating
violating her conditions. 1 The her conditions? The court court
6 6
7 accepted the Defendant's
eventually accepted Defendant's guilty guiltyplea
pleaas
as to
to her
herfelony
felonypossession
possessioncharge
chargeon
onJanuary
January 4,
8 8 See Judgment 2019. See Judgment(Jan.
(Jan.30,
30,2019).
2019).Since
Sincethe
thecourt's
court'sacceptance
acceptanceof
of her
herguilty
guilty plea, the Defendant
9 9 received twelve received twelve more more violations
violations from
from Probation
Probation for
forviolating
violatingher
herprobationary conditions. 2 probationary conditions
10 10 Shortly Shortly after the
the Defendant was picked
Defendant was picked up
up on a warrant
warrant of
of arrest, the People
arrest, the People filed its 11 11 to Revoke
Motion to Revoke Probation 6, 2023.
Probation on April 6, 2023. See See Ppl.'s
Pp1.'s Mot.
Mot. Revoke
Revoke (Apr. 6,
6, 2023).
2023). The
12 12
13 13 Defendant subsequently subsequentlyfiled
filed her
herOpposition
Oppositionto
tothe
theMotion
Motionon
onApril
April 25,
25, 2023.
2023.See
SeeDef.'s
Def.'s Opp'n
14 14 (Apr. 25, 2023).
(Apr. 25, 2023). After Afteraabrief
briefcontinuance
continuance for
forthe
the scheduled
scheduled Revocation
RevocationHearing,
Hearing, the
the court
court heard
heard
15 15 oral arguments on the arguments on theDefendant's Defendant's revocation
revocation on
on July 17, 2023.
2023. Following
Following the
the hearing,
hearing, the court
16 16 took the matter Linder advisementpursuant under advisement pursuantotoSupreme SupremeCourt
Courtof
ofGuam
GuamAdministrative
Administrative Rule
Rule 06-
17 17 001, CVR 7.l(e)(6)(A) 001, CVR 7.l(e)(6)(A)and andCR1.1
CRl.1ofofthe
theLocal
LocalRules
Rulesofofthe
theSuperior
Superior Court
Court of
ofGuam.
Guam.
18 18
19 19 On January 18,2024, January 18, courtfiled thecourt
2024,the filedits itsDecision
Decisionand
andOrder
Ordergranting
grantingthe
thePeople's
People'sMotion
Motion
20 to Revoke Revoke the the Defendant's
Defendant's Probation
Probation and
and sentenced the Defendant sentenced the Defendanttotothree three(3)
(3) years
years of
21 imprisonment with credit for for time
time sewed.
served.See
SeeDecision
Decisionand
andOrder
Order(Jan.
(Jan. 18,
18, 2024).
2024). Pursuant
Pursuant to 8
22
23 23
24 24 11 See See 1st It Violation
ViolationReport
Report(Mar.
(Mar. 26,
26, 2018), 2nd Violation 2018); 2nd Violation Report Report (May
(May 8,8, 2018);
2018); 3rd
3rd Violation
Violation Report (May 29, 29, 25 2018); 4th Violation Report 4th Violation Report (June 27,2018);
(June 27, 2018); 5th
5thViolation
Violation Report
Report (Aug.
(Aug. 23, 2018); 6th Violation Report (Sept. 24, 2018), 2018); 7th 7th Violation
Violation Report
Report (Oct. 1,6, 2018), 8th Violation Report (Dec. 3, 1,6, 2018); 3, 2018), 2018); 9th
9th Violation
Violation Report
Report (Dec.
(Dec. 31
31,
26 2018).
2 2 See 1st See 1stViolation Violation Report
Report(Feb.
(Feb. 6,
6, 2019);
2019), 2nd
2nd Violation Report (Mar.
Violation Report (Mar. 25, 25, 2019);
2019), 3rd
3rd Violation
Violation Report
Report (Aug.
(Aug. 12,
12,
27 27 2019); 4th Violation Violation Report (Aug. 23, 23, 2019);
2019); 5th
5th Violation
Violation Report
Report (Sept.
(Sept. 19,
19, 2019); 6th Violation Report (Sept. 19, 6th Violation
2019); 7th Violation Report (Oct.
(Oct. 30, 2019);
2019); 8th Violation
Violation Report
Report (Nov.
(Nov. 13,
13, 2019);
2019); 9th
9th Violation Report (Oct. 30, 28 28 2020); 10th Report (Dec.
10th Violation Report (Dec. 15, 2021);
2021); nth
11thViolation
ViolationReport (May18, Report(May 2022);12th 18,2022); 12th Violation ViolationReport
Report (June
(June
27, 2022).
2022).
Decision & Decision Order Re.
& Order Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
Motiontoto Reconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People v. Taitague, CFO 177-14 Taitague, CFOl77-14
of8
Page 2 of
GCA GCA §§120.46, 120.46, the
the Defendant
Defendant timely
timely filed
filed her
her Motion
Motion to
to Reconsider
Reconsider Revocation
Revocation and
and for
for
1
T
2 2 Reduction of Sentence ("Motion to Sentence ("Motion to Reconsider")
Reconsider") on
on April
April26,
26, 2024.
2024.
3 DISCUSSION 4 The court A. The court finds
finds that
that there
there are
are .no
no grounds
grounds to
to reconsider
reconsider Defendant
Defendant Taitague's
Taitague's
5 revocation of probation.
revocation
6 Under the the Local Rules of
ofthe
the Superior
Superior Court of
of Guam:
Guam:
7 (d) d) Motion
Motionfor forReconsideration.
Reconsideration. AAmotion motionmay maybeberenewed renewed only
onlyon onthe
the grounds
grounds
r
8 of (1) aa material
material difference
difference inin fact
fact or
orlaw
lawHom
fromthat
thatpresented
presented toto the
the court
court
9 before before such decision that in the such decision the exercise exercise of reasonable
reasonable diligence could could not
10 10 have been known to to the the party
party moving
moving for reconsideration reconsideration atat the
the time
time of
of
such decision,
decision, or,
11 11 (2)
(2) the
the emergence
emergence of ofnew
newmaterial
material facts
facts or
or aa change oflaw
law occurring after
the time ofof such
such decision, or,
12 (3) (3) aa manifest
manifest showing
showing ofofaafailure
failure totoconsider
considermaterial
material facts
facts presented
presented to
13 13 the Court before such decision. .
14 14 No No motion
motion for
forreconsideration
reconsideration shall
shall in
in any
any manner
manner repeat any oral repeat any oral or written written
argument madein argument made insupport supportof
ofor
orin
inopposition
opposition to
to the
theoriginal
original motion.
15 15
16 16 CR 1. 1(d)(1)-(3).
CR 1. l(d)(l)-(3). In In other words, the trial trial court's reconsideration reconsideration of
ofaa motion
motion is
is appropriate where
17 17 it: "(1)
"(1) is presented with new presented with new evidence;
evidence, (2)
(2) committed
committed clear
clear error
error or
or the
the decision
decision was manifestly
18 18 unjust, or (3) unjust, or (3) if ifthere is
is an
an intervening change
change in
in controlling law."3 Petition of controlling1aw."3Petition ofQuitugua v. Flores, Quitugua v. Flores,
19 19 2004 2004 Guam Guam 19 ,r 38 (citing Ward 19 11 Ward v. Reyes, 1998 ,r 11). However, motions Guam 11 11
1998 Guam motions for 20 20
reconsideration are "both "both 'procedurally
'procedurally and
and substantively deficient' if they substantively deficient' they simply simply reiterate
reiterate in
21
22 22 greater detail arguments previously made before arguments previously before the the court."
court."Guam Bar Ethics
Ethics Comm.
Comm. v.Maquera,
Maquera,
23 23 2001 Guam 20 ,r 2001 Guam 1]9 (quotingMerchant 9 (quoting Merchant v.
v. Nanyo Realty Inc., 1998 1998 Guam ,r
Guam 26 1]8-9).
24 24
25 25
26 26 3 3 While the the Motion
Motion for
for Reconsideration
Reconsideration up for
for appeal
appeal inin Petition
Petition of ofQuitugua
Quitugua v. v. Flores
Flores was
was aa civil Motion
Motion for
27 27 Reconsideration filed under Reconsideration filed underCVR CVR 7.1 7.l(e),
e CR CR- -1.1(d) is the 1.1 (d) is statutory authority the statutory authority forfor criminal criminal Motions
Motions for
for
Reconsideration, which bears the same bears the samelanguage
languageas asCVR
CVR 7.l(e).
7.l(e). Therefore,
Therefore,the
thecourt
courtfinds
findsthat
thatthe
the Supreme
Supreme Court
28 28 of ofGuam's Guam's analysis
analysis over
over aa civil
civilMotion
Motionfor
forReconSideration
Reconsideration cancan be applied to be applied to this
this Motion
Motion for
for Reconsideration
Reconsideration at
at
issue issue in this criminal case.
case.
Decision Decision &&Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People v. Taitague, cF0177-14 v. Taitague, CF0177-14
Page Page 3 of8
of 8
Pursuant to 99 GCA Pursuant to GCA §§ 80.66(a)(2),4 80.66(a)(2), 4 the
the Defendant
Defendant argued
argued that the Government that the Government failed failed to
to
1
2 show that "committing "committing Ms.
Ms. Taisacan will serve anyone Taisacan to prison will anyone's interests, let alone the ends of
3 justice." Def.'s justice." 's Mot.
Mot. Reconsider
Reconsider at
at 33 (Apr.
(Apr.26,
26,2024).
2024).InInarguing
arguingwhy
whyrevoking.
revokingher
her probation
probation
4 would not serve the public's public's interest
interest and
and the interests
interests of
of justice, she looked at whether society 5 would be safer safer with
with her
her incarcerated the Department incarcerated at the Departmentof of Corrections
Co1Tections("DOC")
("DOC") compared
compared to
6
7. another person person "who
"who poses
poses aamore
moreimmediate
immediate threat
threat to
to the
the community."
community." Id.
Id. atat4.
4. She
She emphasized
emphasized
7
8 that not only has she she not shown herself to be be aa threat
threat to anyone
anyone or
or their
their belongings,
belongings, but
but she
she has
has
9 also not received received new criminal
criminal charges
charges against her. Id.
aga~nst her. Id.
10 In its
its previous
previous motion, the People argued argued that the Defendant's that the Defendant's failure failure to
to comply with
11 11 substantial requirementsof substantial requirements of her probation did not make her a.good good candidate
candidate for
for probation. See
12 12
13 13 generally generally PpL's Ppl. 's Mot.
Mot.Revoke
Revoke(Apr.
(Apr.6,6,2023)
2023}".When
Whenexpanding
expandingon
onthis
thisargument
argument at
at the Defendant's
Defendant's
14 14 Revocation Hearing, Revocation the People Hearing, the Peoplepointed pointedout
outthat
that she
she had made any
had not made any progress progress with
with treatment
treatment--
15 15 the condition condition of ofmost
most concern
concern to the People - since since entering
enterin~ her
her plea
plea back in 2019.
2019.See
SeeRevocation
Revocation
16 16 H'rg Mins. at 3:05:40-07:20PM (July 17, 2023). H'rg Mims. 2023).
17 17 While While Defendant
Defendant Taitague
Taitague mainly
mainly argues
argues in her Motion
Motion to
to Reconsider
Reconsider why the People 18 18
19 19 failed to failed to prove the second prove the second prong of 9 prong of 9 GCA
GCA§§80.66(a)
80.66(a)in
inits
itsoriginal
originalmotion,
motion,she
she does
does not
not present
present
20 20 this argument in such argument in suchaaway
waythat
thatlends supportfor
lendssupport forthe
thecourt's
court'sreconsideration
reconsiderationof
other revocation on
her revocation
21 21 any of ofthe the three
three permissible
permissible grounds provided under CR1.1(d). Namely, under CRl.l(d). Namely, her her arguments
arguments do not:
not:
22 present the court present the court with withnew
new evidence;
evidence, show why the
the court
court either
either committed clear error or was was
23 23 manifestly unjust in its unjust in its decision;
decision, or
or show
show any
any intervening
intervening change
change in
incontrolling
controlling law.
24 24
25
26 26 4 4 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2) reads: "At any time before the discharge of the offender or the termination of the period of 9 GCA § 80.66(a)(2) reads: "At any time before the discharge of the offender or the termination of the period of suspension orprobation suspension or probation...
; .. the court,
court, if
if satisfied
satisfied that the offender that the offender has inexcusably failed failed to comply
complywith
withaasubstantial
substantial
27 27 requirement imposed as a condition condition of the order may revoke the suspension or probation of the order may revoke the suspension or probation and and sentence or re-sentence the offender.
offender. Violation Violation ofofa acondition conditionshall
shallnot
notresult
resultininrevocation,
revocation,however,
however,unless
unlessthe
thecourt
courtdetermines
determines that
that
28 28 revocation revocation under under all the
the circumstances
circumstances then will best existing will
thenexisting best satisfy the the ends
ends of
ofjustice
justice and
and the best interests
interests of the
public." public."
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re.
Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People People v. Taitague, CF0177-14 v. Taitague, CF0177-14
Page Page 4 of8
Further, the Local Further, the Local Rules Rules of
of the
the Superior
Superior Court
Court of
of Guam
Guam are
are clear
clear in
in requiring
requiring that
that no
l 2 2 motion for for reconsideration
reconsideration "shall
"shall in
in any
any manner
manner repeat
repeat any oral or
or written
written argument
argument made
made in
3 support of or in opposition to support of to the the original motion." CR
CR 1.1(d)
1.1 (d)(emphasis
(emphasis added).
added). To
To support
support her
4 . . . . .
Motionto Motlon to Reconslder, Reconsider, she
she reiterated
reiterated and
and elaborated on the
the fact
fact that
that no
no new
new criminal
cnmlnal charges have
have
5 been filed against her. See against her. SeeDef.
Def.'s Mot. Reconsider
Reconsider at
at 4 (Apr.
(Apr. 26,
26, 2024).
2024). However,
However, the
the Defendant
Defendant
6 7 made argumentduring made this argument duringher herRevocation
Revocation Hearing on
on July
July 17,
17, 2023.
2023. When requesting the court 7
8 8 not to revoke her at revoke her at that
that time, the
the Defendant
Defendant argued that
that "while
"while she
she hasn't
hasn't been
been showing
showing up,
up, at
at
9 9 least she she hasn't
hasn't been
beencoming
coming in
in on
on new
new magistrates
magistratesand
andnew
newcharges."
charges."Revocation
RevocationH'rg
H'rg Mins. at
at
10 10 3:08:41-08:50 (July 17, 2023). Based on the 17, 2023). the Supreme SupremeCourt
Courtof
of Guam's analysis
analysis for
for motions for
11 11 reconsideration and reconsideration and CR CR 1.1(d),
1.1 this
this court
court denies
denies reconsideration
reconsideration of
of Defendant
Defendant Taitague's
Taitague' s
12 12
13 13 revocation of of probation.
probation.
14 14 B. The The court
court finds
finds that
thatDefendant
DefendantTaitague's
Taitague's three-year
three-year sentence would be more sentence would more
appropriate appropriate if served
served at
at Lighthouse
Lighthouse Recovery Center's in-patient treatment Recovery Center's in-patient treatment 15 15 program.
16 The court may reduce
reduce a defendant's sentence within one hundred hundredtwenty
twenty (120)
(120) days after:
after:
17 17 (1) the the imposition
imposition of
ofaasentence,
sentence; (2)
(2)the
thecou1"t's
court's receipt of
ofaa mandate
mandate issued upon
upon affirmance
affirmance of
of
18 18
19 19 the the judgment or dismissal judgment or dismissalof of the
the appeal;
appeal, or
or (3)
(3) entry
entry of
of any
any Supreme
Supreme Court of Guam
Guam order or
20 judgment that judgment thatupholds upholdsa ajudgment
judgmentofofconviction.
conviction.See
See88GCA
GCA §§ 120.46. If the
120.46. If the court
court initially
initially
21 imposed imposed a lawful lawful sentence,
sentence, itit may
may exercise
exercise discretion in reducing discretion in reducing aa sentence sentenceifif "the original 22 sentence sentence now seems unduly unduly harsh"
harsh" upon
upon further
furtherreflection.
reflection. United
United States v.
v. Maynard,
Maynard, 485 F.2d
23
24 247, 248 (9th 247, 248 (9th Cir.
Cir. 1973).
1973).
24
25 Rather than than challenging
challenging the
the legality
legality of
ofher
her sentence,
sentence, the
the Defendant the court Defendant pleas the court for 26 26 leniency through her her Motion
Motion to Reconsider. See United United States v. Thayer, 857 F.2d 1358, 1360 (9th v. Thayer,
27 Cir. 1988).
1988). Specifically,
Specifically,the
theDefendant
Defendantrequests
requeststhe
thecourt
courtto
toreduce
reduce her
her three-year
three-year sentence
sentence so
so that
28
Decision Decision &
& Order
Order Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
Reconsider Revocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
Peoplev. People v. Taifague,CF0177-14 Taitague, Page 5 of 8 she may may receive
receive treatment,
treatment, which
which is currently
currently unavailable
unavailable to
tofemale
female detainees
detainees at DOC. See Def.'s See Def.'s
1
22 Mot. Reconsider Reconsider at
at 11 (Apr.
(Apr.26,
26, 2024).
2024). Should
Should the
the court
court impose
impose any
any period of
ofincarceration,
incarceration, the
3 Defendant also asks that she asks that she serve
serve the
the imposed incarceration either at Guam Guam Behavioral
Behavioral Health
4 . . | .
and Wellness Wellness Center
Center Women's Residential or Women's Resldentlal or at at The
The Salvation
Salvatlon Army
Army Lighthouse
Llghthouse Recovery
Recovery Center
5 ("Loc"). ("LRC"). ld.
Id. at
at 7.
6 Although Although the
the court
court issued
issued its Decision
Decision and
and Order
Order revoking
revoking Defendant
Defendant Taitague's
Taitague's
7
8 probation, the court probation, the court has hasnot
notyet
yet filed
tiled its judgment
judgment formalizing the revocation of ofprobation
probation and
and
9 imposition of of aa sentence.
sentence. Pursuant to the Pursuant to the Defendant's Defendant's Plea
Plea Agreement, "the
"the Court
Court may
may impose
10 10 any sentence that may have been imposed originally originally for
for the
the crime of
of which
which Defendant
Defendant is pleading
11 .
guilty to." guilty to." Plea PleaAgreement
Agreementatat44 (Jan.
(Jan. 4,
4, 2019)
2019) (emphasis
(emphasis added).
added).
12 12
13 Defendant Taitaguepied Defendant Taitague pledguilty guiltytotothe
theoffense
offenseofofPOSSESSION
POSSESSIONOF
OFAA SCHEDULE
SCHEDULE II
14 14 CONTROLLED CONTROLLEDSUBSTANCE SUBSTANCE(As a 3rd
(As Degree
a 3rd Felony).
Degree Based
Felony). onon
Based this
thischarge,
charge,the
thesubstantial
substantial
15 15 requirement imposed as requirement imposed as aa condition condition in
in this
this case
case was
was the
the Defendant's completion of oftreatment.
treatment.
16 16 Despite waiting to to pursue
pursue treatment until after the court had taken treatment until taken the the Defendant's revocation 17 18 under advisement, the under advisement, the Defendant Defendant has
has now
now chosen to pursue in-patient treatment pursue in-patient treatment through throughLRC.
LRC.
18
19 19 Based Based on the the Defendant's history of non-compliance Defendant's history with Probation, non-compliance with Probation, specifically specifically her
her lack
lack of
20 reporting reporting and and lack of
of progress
progress towards
towards treatment,
treatment, reducing the Defendant's reducing the Defendant's sentence sentence is not
not
21 21 appropriate. appropriate.
22 22 Given Given that
that the Defendant is
is serving
sewing time at DOC, without without receiving
receiving any
any treatment
treatment for her
23 23 addiction, the court finds that the the remaining
remaining time of
ofthe
the Defendant's
Defendant's three-year
three-year sentence would be sentence would
24 24
more appropriate if served at a treatment treatmentfacility. 5 According to the Defendant, facility.5
25 appropriate if According LRCassessed LRC assessed her
26 26 and hadaabed and had bedwaiting waitingfor
forher
heras ofApril
asof April 26,
26, 2024.
2024.See
SeeDef.
Def.'s Mot. Reconsider (Apr. 26, 's Mot. 26, 2024).
27
28 55 Upon Upon inquiry with Probation, the Defendant has 741 days of of credit
credit earned in this matter.
Decision Decision &&Order
OrderRe.
Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People People v.
v. Taitague,
Taitague, CF0177-14
CF0177-14
Page Page 6 of8
of 8
Should Should that that bed still be available for in-patient treatment treatment at LRC, the court will allow her to serve 1
22 the remaining time of of her
her sentence
sentence there. If aa bed there. If bed is
is no
no longer
longer available,
available, the court
court will order
order that
3 Defendant Taitague Taitague remain
remain at
at DOC until
until another bed opens up for for her
her to
to receive
receive in-patient
in-patient
4 4 LRC or treatment at LRC or another another treatment
treatment program.
program. If
Ifnecessary
necessaryto
toensure
ensurethe
theDefendant's
Defendant's enrollment
enrollment
5 in in-patient in-patient treatment, the court will further treatment, the further order that LRC, LRC, or
or another
another qualified
qualified in-patient
in-patient
6
7 re-assess the treatment program, assess or re-assess the Defendant Defendant in the event a bed is no longer longer available for
7
8 her.
99 \\ 10 10 \\ 11 11 \\ 12
13 13 \ \\
14 \\
15 15 m \\ 16 16 \\ 17
\\ 18
19 19 \\
20 20 \\
21 \\ 22 22 \\\ 23 \\ 24 25 25 \\\ 26 26 \ \\
27 \\
28 \\ \\
Decision Decision &&Order
OrderRe.
Re. Defendant's
Defendant's Motion
MotiontotoReconsider
ReconsiderRevocation
Revocationand
and Reduction
Reduction of
ofSentence
Sentence
People People v.
v. Taitague,
Taitague, CF0177-14
CF0177-14
Page Page 7 of8
of
CONCLUSION
2 For the reasons stated above, the court hereby GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN
3 PART the Defendant's Motion to Reconsider Revocation and Reduction of Sentence. 4 Specifically, the court denies reconsideration of Defendant Taitague' s Revocation of Probation.
5 However, the court GRANTS a reduction of the Defendant's sentence to the extent that she will 6
7 serve the remainder of her imprisonment sentence at an in-patient treatment program
8 available to her. The court's Judgment issuing revocation and imposing the sentence shall be 9 filed concurrent with this Decision and Order.
SO ORDERED this
FEB 1 7 2025
12 -----------
13
14
15
16 HONORABLE ALBERTO E. TOLENTINO 17 Judge, Superior Court of Guam
18
19
20
21
22
23 SERVICE VIA EMAIL I acknQWiedge that an electronic 24 copy of the original was e-mailed to:
25
26 Date: ~ e : ;l!. I?, f)Fi,...
.
27
28
Decision & Order Re. Defendant's Motion to Reconsider Revocation and Reduction of Sentence People v. Taitague, CF0177-l4 Page 8 of8