People v. Tedtaotao

Opinion

Gs a §.. § E G? {8§2}{T l 2825 APR -7 PM Lg! 32 2 I-"8 JT | r* t=§¥§l*s &- K"b 3

5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT COURT OF OF GUAM GUAM 6 6 )) CRIMINAL CRIMINALCASE CASE no. NO.CF0239-85 CF0239-85 7 PEOPLE OF GUAM, GUAM, )) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE CASE NO. NO. CF0058-86 CF00SS-86 ) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE CASE NO. NO. CF0097-86 CF0097-86 8 vs. ) CRIMINAL CASE CASE no. NO.CF0194-90 CF0194-90 9 )) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE CASE no. NO.CF0214-91 CF0214-91 )) CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CASE CASE NO. NO. CF0570-96 CF0570-96 10 10 VINCENT T. VINCENT TEDTAOTAO, T. TEDTAOTAO, ) Q) 11 ')) DECISION DECISION & ORDER )) RE. AMENDED AMENDED MOTION MOTION FOR 12 12 Defendant. )) COMPASSIONATE COMPASSIONATE RELEASE; ________________ ) m MOTION MOTION FOR FOR RESENTENCING 13

14' 14. This matter matter came before the came before the Honorable Honorable Alberto Alberto E. E. Tolentino on on January January 7, 2025, 2025, for 15 15 hearing on Defendant DefendantVincent VincentT. T.Tedtaotao's Tedtaotao's("Defendant") ("Defendant") Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate 16 16 and Alternative Release and Motionfor Alterative Motion forResentencing. Resentencing. The The Defendant Defendant was was present present via via Zoom with 17 17

18 counsel counsel Public Defender Zachary Taimanglo. Taimanglo. Assistant Assistant Attorney General General Aaron Aaron Boyce Boyce was

19 19 present for the present for thePeople Peopleof ofGuam Guam("People"). ("People"). Following Followingthe the hearing, hearing, the court took took the the matter under 20 20 advisement pursuant pursuantotoSupreme SupremeCourt CourtofofGuam Guam Administrative Administrative Rule Rule 06-001, 06-001, CVR7.1( CVR 7.l(e)(6)(A) e)(6)(A) 21 CR 1.1 and CR of the Local 1.1 of Rules of Local Rules ofthe the Superior Superior Court Court of ofGuam. Guam. Having Having duly duly considered consideredthe the parties parties'' 22 22 briefings, briefings, oral oral arguments, arguments, and the the applicable applicable law, the court now issues issues this Decision Decision and and Order 23

24 24 DENYING the Defendant's Amended Motion Motion for forCompassionate Compassionate Release; and and DENYING DENYING the

'25 Defendant's Alternative Alterative Motion Motionfor forResentencing. Resentencing. 26 26 \\ \\ 27 27 \\ 28 28

Decision Decision &&Order OrderRe. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release; Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. v. Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0058-86; CF0097-86; CFOI94-90; Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0194-90; CF0214-91; CF0570-96 CF0570-96 Page Page 1I oof 10 10 BACKGROUND 1

2 2 A. Defendant Defendant Tedtaotao's Criminal Matters Tedtaotao's Criminal Matters

3 1986, the Defendant On May 27, 1986, convicted of Defendant was convicted ofthe the following following offenses offensesininCF0239-85 CF0239-85: 4 . Aggravated Murder, Murder; Attempted Attempted Murder as a lesser-lncluded offense of lesser-included offense of Attempted Aggravated 5 Murder; and two counts of Possession and Use Murder, Use of a Deadly Deadly Weapon Weapon During the of the Commission of 6 7 a Felony. See Judgment Judgment (CF0239-85) (Aug. 25, 1986). For the charge of Aggravated Murder, the 7

8 Defendant Defendant was sentenced sentenced to to life life imprisonment imprisonment without without parole. parole. Id. As to the charge of Attempted

99 Murder, the Defendant Defendant was sentenced sentenced to to serve fifteen fifteen (15) (15) years to run concurrently with his life 10 10 imprisonment sentence. imprisonment Id.The sentence.Id. The Defendant Defendantwas was also also sentenced sentencedtotoserve servefive five (5) years for each (5) years each 11 11 count of Possession and Use of a Deadly Weapon During the Commission of of aa Felony, to run 12 12

13 13 consecutively with the sentences for Aggravated Murder Murder and Attempted Attempted Murder. Id.

14 14 On April 16, 16, 1987, the the Defendant pled guilty to two charges of Felony Escape, Escape; one in 15 15 CF0058-86 CF0058-86 and another in CF0097-86. CF0097-86. See See Judgment (CF0058-86 (CF0058-86 & CF0097-86) CF0097-86) (May 13, 13, 16 16 1987). 1987). For these offenses, the court sentenced him to to serve serve five five (5) (5) years for each charge, to run 17 17 18 concurrently with one another, another; but to run consecutively to the sentences imposed in CF0239-85. 18

19 19 Id.

20 On January January 24, 1991, the the Defendant pled guilty to another charge charge of Felony Escape in 21 CF0194-90 CFO 194-90 and was sentenced to serve three (3) years of of imprisonment imprisonment to run consecutively consecutively with 22 his sentence hi.s sentenceimposed imposedin in CF0239-85. See Judgment CF0239-85. See Judgment (CF0194-90) (Jan. 30, 1991). (CF0194-90) (Jan. 23

24 24 After a jury trial, trial, the the Defendant Defendant was was convicted convicted of the following offenses on. September

25 25 12, 1992: Robbery (As a 2nd Degree Felony); Kidnapping (As a 2nd Degree Felony), Felony); Burglary

26 26 (As a 2nd 2nd Degree Degree Felony), Felony); Special Special Allegation of Possession and Use of a Deadly Possession and Deadly Weapon, Weapon; 27 27 Terrorizing errorizing (As (As aa 3rd 3rd Degree Degree Felony), and Felony Escape Felony); and Escape (As aa 3rd 3rd Degree Degree Felony). Felony). See See 28

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. v. Tedtaotao, Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0058-86; CF0097-86; CF0194-90; CF0214-91; CF0570-96 CF0570,96 Page Page 2 of 10 10 Judgment Judgment (CF0214-91) (CF0214-91) (Mar. (Mar. 15, 15, 1993). The Defendant Defendant was sentenced sentenced to to serve serve ten ten (10) years for 1

2 each of the following charges, charges, which all all ran concurrently with one another: another: the first first charge of of

33 Robbery (As a 2nd Degree Felony), Felony); the third and fifth Eph charges of of Kidnapping (As a 2nd Degree 4 . Felony), Felony); and the seventh charge of of Burglary Burglary (As aa 2nd 2nd Degree Degree Felony). Felony). Id. Id. For For each each Speclal Special 5 Allegation of Allegation of Possession Possession and Use of Deadly Weapon, the Defendant of a Deadly Defendant was also sentenced to serve 6 twenty-five (25) twenty-five (25) years; years, all all running mnningconcunently concurrentlywith witheach eachother other but but consecutive consecutive to the ten-year 7

8 sentence imposed sentence imposed in in this case. 1 Id. Lastly, the Defendant this case.l Defendant was sentenced sentenced to to serve serve Eve five (5) (5) years for

99 the ninth charge of Degree Felony) and another five (5) years for eleventh of Terrorizing (As a 3rd Degree

10 charge of Felony Escape. of Felony IdBoth Escape. Id Bothwould wouldrun runconcurrently concurrentlywith witheach eachother other but but consecutive consecutive to to the the 11 11 sentences imposed imposed in CF0214-91 and and his other previous cases. Id. cases. Id. 12 12

13 13 Pursuant to a Plea Agreement, the Defendant pled guilty to one count of Felony Escape

14 14 (As a 3rd Degree Felony) in CF0570-96 on May May 21, 21, 1997. Judgment (CF0570-96) (May 28, 1997. See Judgment 15 15 1997). 1997). For that that offense, he was sentenced offense, he sentenced to serve serve three three (3) (3) years years of ofincarceration, incarceration, to run 16 16 } concurrently with his sentence imposed imposed in in CF0239-85. Id. rt 17 17 While CF0239-85 was still assigned to the Honorable Maria T. T. Cenzon, Cenzon, she appointed the 18 18

19 19 Public Defender Service Corporation ("PDSC") to represent the Corporation ("PDSC") the Defendant on September September 24,

20 2021. See See Order Appointing Counsel (Sept. (Sept. 24, 2021). 2021). Upon this court's later later assignment to 21 CF0239-85, the Defendant filed CF0239~85, the filed a Motion to Consolidate all his criminal matters matters on December 22 27, 2022. See See Mot. Mot. Consolidate Consolidate (Dec. (Dec. 27, 27, 2022). 2022). The Thecourt courtsubsequently subsequently granted the consolidation consolidation 23

24 of of all the Defendant's Defendant's Criminal criminal matters during a Status Hearing held on October Status Hearing October 3, 3, 2023. 2023. See 24

25 Status H'rg H'rg Mims. 3:02:01PM (Oct. 3, 2023). Mins. at 3:02:0lPM

26 26 \ \\ 27

28 28 11 The The Special Special Allegation Allegation of ofPossession Possession and Use ofa and Use inCharges Deadly Weapon was contained in of a Deadly ChargesTwo, Two, Four, Four,Six, Six, Eight, Eight, and Ten of the Indictment. See Indictment (Oct. of the Indictment. See Indictment (Oct. 24, 1991).

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. v. Tedtaotao, Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0058-86, CF0058-86; CF0097-86; CF0194-90; CF0194-90; CF0214-91; CF0214-91; CF0570-96 CF0570-96 Page Page 3 of 10 10 r i

B. Defendant DefendantTedtaotao's Tedtaotao's Transfer Transferto to the the Bureau Bureau of of Prisons 1

2 On May 24, 24, 2022, 2022, Probation Probation Services Services Division.("Probation") Division_ ("Probation") filed filedan anInformational Informational

3 Report addressing the the Defendant's Defendant's transfer transfer of custody custody from the the Department of ofCorrections Corrections 4 ("DOC") ("DOC")totothe the Bureau of Prisons Bureau of Prisons("BOP"). ("BOP"). In In the report, report, Probation indicated that; that 5 On November 29, 1996, 1996,DOCDOCofficials officials requested thatTEDTAOTAO requested that TEDTAOTAO be be placed placed into 6 federal custody due to to DOC's DOC's lack custody due lack of ofmanpower, manpower, inadequate facilities, and limited inadequate facilities, rehabilitative programs.DOC rehabilitative programs. DOC also also stated statedthat thatTEDTAOTAO TEDTAOTAO was was identified identified as as aa 7 high escape risk and that high escape risk and that he presented a danger to to other inmates. inmates. 8 Informational (May 24, 2022). After BOP officials Report (May Informational Report officialsstated stated their willingness and ability to 9

10 receive the the Defendant Defendant into foto their their custody, he was officially officiallytransferred transferred from DOC to to BOP's

111 June 4, 1997; specifically, to the custody on June the United States Penitentiary (USP) Allenwood, States Penitentiary 12 12 Pennsylvania. Id. Pennsy1vania.Id. 13 1 C. Defendant DefendantTedtaotao's Tedtaotao'sRequest Requestfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release Release 14 14 Before Before filing filingaamotion motionwith withthe theSuperior SuperiorCourt, Court,the theDefendant Defendantrequested requested compassionate compassionate 15 15

16 16 release in two separate separate letters to the Department of of Corrections, Corrections; one one dated dated January 28, 2021, and

17 17 another dated March another dated March 1, 2021. See Amended Mot. See Amended Mot. (May 23, 2024). On April 14, 2021, the 18 18 Defendant filed aa Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release Releaseand and aa request request for for appointment appointment of counsel. counsel. 19 19 See Mot. (Apr. (Apr. 14, 14, 2021). 2021). The The People Peoplethen then tiled filed its its Opposition Opposition to to the the Motion Motion for for Compassionate Compassionate 20 20 Release on May 20, 20~ 2022. The People additionally additionally filed aa Motion to Dismiss regarding regarding the 21

22 22 Compassionate Release Release argument argument on July July 8, 2022. 23 23 After being appointed PDSC as counsel, the Defendant Defendant filed aan Amended Amended Motion for 24 Compassionate Releaseand Compassionate Release andAlternative Alterative Motion Motion for Resentencing ("Amended Motion") Resentencing ("Amended Motion") on May 25 23, 2024. The 23, 2024. The People People filed its Opposition to to the the Amended Amended Motion Motion in in the the following following week. week. The 26 26

27 court scheduled scheduled aa Motion Motion Hearing to address the Defendant's address the Defendant'sAmended AmendedMotion, Motion, which was later 27

28 28 rescheduled rescheduled to to January January 7, 7, 2025 2025..

Decision Decision & & Order Order Re. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. v. Tedtaotao, Tedtaotao, CF0239-85, CF0239-85; CF0058-86, CF0058-86; CF0097-86, CF0097-86; CF0194-90, CF0194-90; CF0214-91, CF0214-91; CF0570-96 Page Page 4 of 10 10 During the the Motion Motion Hearing, Hearing, the the Defendant Defendant called called his sister and himself sister and himself to to testify testify iN in 1

2 support of of his his Amended Motion 2 See generally Mot. H'rg Amended Motion. H'rg Mims. (Jan. 7, Mins. (Jan. 7, 2025). 2025). After.hearing After fearing the

3 argument, the court took the matter under parties' argument, under advisement but allowed supplemental briefing 4 on the relevance of Adriatico33 in this case. of People v.v. Adriatico case. Id The The Defendant Defendant subsequently subsequently filed file~ his 5 Supplemental Brief Supplemental Briefon onFebruary February10, 10, 2025 2025. 6

7 DISCUSSION

8 Compassionate release is a means by which which aa district district court can modify or reduce a prison 9 sentence sentence under under 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(1)(A)4 so long 3582(c)(l)(A) 4 so long as as the the defendant defendant shows shows "extraordinary "extraordinary and and 10 compelling reasons" for for the" modification or the modification or reduction; reduction, and and that modification modification or reduction is 11 11

consistent consistent with with factors factors laid laid out out in in 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3553(a). 18 U.S.C.A. 3553(a). United States v. v. Mosely, Mosely, 701 F. Supp. 12 12

13 13 3d ad 597, 598-99 {S.D. (S.D. Tex. 2023) (quoting United States States vv McFadden, McFadden, 2022 WL 715489, *2 (5th

14 14 Cir 2022)). 2022)). A A district district court court can can only only make make this this determination after after receiving receiving a motion motion from the

15 15 Director ect or of of the he BOP or or t the he defenda nt If defendant. If aa dis district court isis ma t r ict cour king aa det making er mina t determination for for 16 16 compassionate release release on a defendant's motion, the motion motion must must have have been been filed filed either either after after the 17 17

18 18 22 Pursuant Pursuant to toLocal Local Rule Rule ofof the the Superior Court of Superior Court of Guam Guam CR 1.1, the the court court denied denied the the People's People's attempt to call witnesses witnesses 19 to testify absent a witness list that that was was filed filed and served "[w]ithin twenty-four hours of of the the scheduled scheduled evidentiary evidentiary hearing." 20 33 People v. Adriatico, People V. Adriatico, 2024 Guam 7. - 4 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(l)(A) 3582(c)(1)(A) provides provides as as follows: follows: 4

21 (A) the court, upon motion of of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, or upon upon motion of the defendant after the defendant has fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure failure of thethe Bureau of 22 Prisons to brirtg bring a motion on ~n the defendant's behalf behalf or the lapse of 30 days from the receipt of such a request by the warden of the defendant's facility, whichever defendant's facility, whichever isis earlier, earlier,may mayreduce reducethetheterm tem of 23 imprisonment imprisonment (and may impose impose aa term ofof probation or supervised probation or supervised release with or without conditions that does not exceed the unnerved unserved portion of the original term of of imprisonment), after considering 24 the factors set forth forth in in section section 3553(a) 3553(a) to to the the extent extentthat thatthey theyare areapplicable, applicable,ifit if itfinds findsthat- that- . (i) extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction; reduction, or . 25 25 (ii) the defendant is at least least 70 70 years years ofof age, has served sewed at least 30 years in prison, pursuant to a sentence sentence imposed under section 3559(c), 3559(c), for the offense offense or offenses offenses for which the 26 26 defendant is currently currently imprisoned, imprisoned, and a determination determination hashas been been made made by the th~ Director of the Bureau of of Prisons that the defendant is not a danger danger to the the safety safety of any other person 27 27 or the community, as provided under section 3142(g); 3142(g),

28 28 and that that such such aa reduction reduction is is consistent consistent with with applicable applicable policy statements issued by the statements issued Sentencing Commission. .

Decision Decision &&Order OrderRe. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0058-86; People CF0058-86, CF0097-86, CF0097-86; CF0194-90, CF0194-90; CF0214-91, CF0214°91; CF0570-96 CF0570-96 Page Page 5 ofl0 of 10 defendant defendant "fully "fully exhausted exhausted,all all administrative administrative rights rights to to appeal appeal aa failure failure of of the Bureau Bureau of of Prisons to l 22 bring a motion on the defendant's defendant's behalf behalfor or the lapse lapse of of 30 days from the receipt receipt of of such a request

3 by by the the warden warden of of the the defendant's defendant's facility." facility." 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(1)(A) 3582(c)(l)(A) (Dec. (Dec. 21, 21, 2018). 2018). 4 A. This This trial trialcourt courtdoes doesnot nothave haveauthority authoritytotogrant grantDefendant DefendantTedtaotao's Tedtaotao's 5 Compassionate Releaseunder Compassionate Release under federal federal statute 18U.S.C.A. statute 18 U.S.C.A. §3582(c)(1)(A). § 3582(c)(l)(A).

6 Guam's laws laws do do not not provide provide local local authority authority for for aa defendant's defendant's compassionate compassionate release, release; 7 » | n . . however, the Defendant asks asks the court to use its inherent inherent authority and reduce his sentence in 8 accordance accordance with with the the procedure procedure outlined outlined in in 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(1)(A). 3582(c)(l)(A). See generally Amended 9

10 10 Mot. (May 23, 2024). "The doctrine of of inherent inherent authority authority allows allows for for aa court court to act on a matter for

11 which the legislature has not provided, or not fully legislature has fully provided, provided, since since equity equity will will not not entertain entertain . '- 12 jurisdiction where a statute provides an adequate statute provides adequate remedy at law." People v. Ho, 2009 2009 Guam Guam18 ,r 181] 13 1 8 (citing Orhvein Ortwein v. Schwab, 498 P.2d 757, 762 (Or. 1972)). "Such powers Powers are strictly procedural 14 14 77 in nature and do not not confer confer any any substantive substantive authority nor nor increase the jurisdiction of of the court. court." 15 15

16 16 Id. (quoting State v. v. Gilkinson, Gilkinson, 790 P.2d 1247, 1249 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990)).

17 17 For instance, case law has recognized a state court's court's inherent Powers powers to "compel funding finding 18 18 for judiciary equipment, facilities, and Sl.1ppoIltiI'1g personnel, to punish for supporting personnel, for contempt, contempt, to appoint 19 19 counsel for indigent criminal defendants, to grant bail, to compel the the attendance of witnesses and 20 20

the production of evidence, to regulate the practice oflaw, law, and to control photography in court to 21

22 22 ensure a fair trial." Ho, 2009 2009 Guam ,r 9 (citing In re Salary of Guam 1] of.]uvenile Dir., 552 P.2d 163, 171 Juvenile Dir., 171

23 23 (Wash. 1976)). Although Although the the Guam Guam Supreme Supreme Court did did not not explicitly explicitly rule rulein into Hothat that the the trial trial court 24 24 inherent authority to expunge, it had inherent made no it made no such such ruling ruling since since the defendant did the defendant did not not dérnonstrate demonstrate 25 a justification justification for for the the court courtto to expunge expungethe thematter mattereven evenif if it ithas hasthat thatinherent authority.~Ia'. inherent authority: Id.1],r 33.5 33. 5 26 26

27 27

28 28 5 5 In People In v. Ho, People v. Ho, the power power that the the Defendant Defendant argued the the trial trial court court had had inherent inherent authority authority to to exercise exercise was the power power to expunge a criminal matter not not based based on on Guam's Guam's statutory definition definition for for expungernent. expungement.

Decision Decision &&Order OrderRe. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release; Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing People People v. Tedtaoiao, Tedtaoiao,CF0239-85, CF0239-85; CF0058-86, CF0058-86; CF0097-86, CF0097-86; CF0194-90, CF0194-90; CF0214-91, CF0214-91; CF0570-96 Page Page 6 of 10 of 10 In seeking compassionate compassionate release, Defendant Defendant Tedtaotao Tedtaotao argues that this court may may exercise 1

22 its inherent its inherent authority authority to to reduce reduce his his sentence sentence under under 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(l)(A). 3582(c)(l)(A). The The Defendant Defendant

3 also also proffers proffers 77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7107(h) 7107(h) .as authority for as authority for the the court court to to grant his compassionate grant his compassionate release, release, 4 . . . . n . under federal guidelines, under federal guldehnes, absent absentany any functional functionalequivalent equlvalentwithin wlthlnGuam's Guam'slaws. laws. 77 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 5 7107(h) gives each court of of Guam the "power "power [t]o [t]oamend amendand and control controlits itsprocess process and and orders orders so as 6 6

7 to make them conformable conformable to law and justice." However, the Defendant does not explain how 7

88 these federal sentencing guidelines guidelines control control or or why why they they are are persuasive persuasive for for this court. 9 Since his withdrawal of of COVID-19 Pandemic Pandemic as as grounds grounds for for compassionate compassionate release, release, the 10 10 Defendant now Defendant nowseeks seeks compassionate compassionaterelease release on onthe the grounds grounds that that he has already served mote more than 11

thirty (30) years thirty years of ofconfinement confinement and and suffers suffers "a "a myriad myriad of ofphysical physicalailments ailments associated associated with with the the 12 12

13 13 aging process." Amended Amended Mot. Mot. at at 6 (May 23, 2024). During the Motion Hearing, the Defendant

14 14 testified that he suffered from: depression, high blood blood pressure, pressure, and and joint joint and and back back pain. See Mot. 15 15 H'rg Mins. Mins. at at 9:28:54 - 29:57AM 29:57AM (Jan. (Jan. 7, 7, 2025). 2025). In addition addition to to his physical ailments and thirty 16 16 (30) (30) years years of incarceration, Defendant uses incarceration, Defendant uses the the fact fact that that he he resides resides in in a federal federal prison prison as as 17 17 V 18 justification for why a court's inherent inherent authority allows this court to reduce his sentence pursuant 18

19 19 to federal to federal statute statute U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(l)(A). 3582(c)(1)(A). While While the the BOP BOP physically physically houses houses the the Defendant, Defendant, he he

20 20 has always remained under Guam DOC's DOC's jurisdiction jurisdiction but but for for his his relocation relocation in 1996 1996 due due to to staff staff 21 shortage and his high risk of escape. 22 22 Although the Defendant is not arguing arguing for for his compassionate compassionate release release due to an an illegal illegal 23

24 sentence sentence imposed on him, Guam allows allows defendants defendants to file file a motion to to reduce reduce a sentence,

25 25 regardless of whether it was legally or illegally imposed, within one hundred twenty (120) days

26 26 after: (1) the after: (1) the sentence was imposed; imposed, (2) the court's receipt of of a mandate affirming a judgment judgment or 27 27 dismissal of of an appeal, Dr (3) appeal; or (3) entry entry of of any any order order or or judgment judgment from from the the Supreme Court of Guam 28

Decision Decision &&Order OrderRe. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People v. Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0239-85, CF0058-86; CF0058-86, CF0097-86; CF0097-86, CF0194-90; CF0194-90, CF0214-91; cF0214-91, CF0570-96 CF0570-96 Page 7 of 10 10 that effectively that effectively upheld upheld aa judgment judgment of ofconviction. conviction. See See 88 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 120.46.6 While the 120.46. 6 While the court agrees court agrees 1

2 compassionate release that compassionate release is is a process process by by which a federal federal district court can reduce a federal federal

3 inmate's inmate's sentence, sentence, this this Superior Superior Court of Guam trial court's court's application of of compassionate release 4 . . . . . . . under U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(1)(A) 3582(c)(l)(A)would wouldincrease increaseits itsJunsdlctlon jurisdiction over over the the matter by going matter by going beyond beyond 5 Guam's Guam's procedures procedures for reducing sentences imposed imposed on on its its inmates. 6

7 Without more, the court finds that it does does not have inherent authority under People v. Ho,

8 or or authority under 7 authority under 7 G.C.A. G.C.A. §§ 7107(h), 7107(h), to to grant grant the the Defendant's Defendant's compassionate compassionate release release in in

9 accordance accordance with with federal federal statute statute 18 18 U.S.C.A. U.S.C.A. §§ 3582(c)(1)(A).7 3582(c)(l)(A). 7 10 10 B. T The GGuam uam SSupreme upreme CCourt o urt OOpinion pinio Adriatico cannott be firmly firmly applied applied to to 11 11 Defendant Tedtaotao's Defendant Tedtaotao's case to warrant his resentencing.

12 After the After the cour court aallowed the the pa r parties to to submit submit supplementa supplementall briefing iefing on PPeople eople v. v. 13 Adriatico 's applicability Adriatico 's applicabilityto to Defendant Defendant Tedtaotao's 's Amended Amended Motion, Motion,the the Defendant Defendant submitted submitted his his 14 14 supplemental supplemental brief brief on on the matter matter on February 10, 2025. The The People People filed no supplemental brief brief in 15 15

16 16 support of its position on Adriatico 's applicability to the applicability to the Defendant. Defendant. Should the court deny the

17 Defendant's Defendant's compassionate release,the compassionate release, theDefendant Defendantalternatively alternatively seeks seeksthe thecourt's court's reconsideration 18 18 of his life life sentence sentence without parole parole ("LWOP") in CF0239-85 CF0239-85 as to the charge charge of of Aggravated Aggravated 19 19 Murder. Murder. At the time of of the Defendant's Defendant's conviction, conviction, Guam's Guam's sentencing sentencing statute statute for for Aggravated Aggravated 20 Murder Murder stated: 21

22 avated murder Aggravated mur der isis aa felony felony of the fir first degree but aa per son convicted person convicted of of aggravated murder shall aggravated murder shall bebe sentenced to life life imprisonment imprisonment notwithstanding notwithstanding any 23 6 Under88G.C.A. 6 Under G.c.A. §§ 120.46: 120.46: 24 The court court may correct correct anan illegal illegal sentence sentence at any time at any time and and may may correct correct aa sentence sentence imposed imposed inin an an illegal illegalmanner manner within within the the time provided provided herein herein for for the the reduction reduction of ofsentence. sentence. TheThe court court may may reduce reduce 25 a sentence sentence within one hundred hundred twenty twenty (120) (120) days days after the sentence sentence is is imposed, imposed, or within one one hundred twenty (120) hundred twenty (120) days days after receipt by the the court of a mandate issued of a mandate issued upon upon affirmance affirmance of thethe 26 26 judgment or judgment or dismissal dismissal of of the appeal, appeal, or within one hundred twenty (120) hundred twenty (120) days days after entry entry of any any order or judgment judgment of of the Supreme Supreme Court Courtofof Guam, Guam, having having thethe effect effect of upholding upholding a judgment judgment of of 27 27 conviction. conviction. 7 Because 7 Becausethethecourt courtfinds findsthat thatitIrhas hasno inherentauthority noinherent authoritytotogrant grantthetheDefendant's Defendant'scompassionate compassionaterelease release under underfederal federal 28 28 sentencing sentencing guidelines, the the court court will notnot address address whether the the Defendant would have succeeded succeeded on thethe merits merits of of his argument for compassionate argument for compassionate release if if itit had had inherent inherent authority authority to grant grant his release inin this this manner. manner.

Decision Decision && Order Order Re. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motion for forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Release; Motion Motion for for Resentencing Resentencing People Peoplev.v.Tedtaotao, Tedtaotao,CF0239-85, CF0239-85;CF0058-86, CF0058-86;CF0097-86, CF0097-86;CF0194-90, CF0194-90; CF0214-91, CF0214-91; CF0570-96 CF0570-96 Page Page 8 8 of of 10 10 other provision provision of oflaw, law; provided, provided,further, further, that that any person convicted convicted of aggravated aggravated 1 murder shall not murder shall not be be eligible for for parole, parole, work work release release nor nor shall shall his his sentence sentence be 2 suspended. suspended.

3 Public Public Law Law16-126 16-126 (1982). (1982).The TheGuam GuamSupreme Supreme Court inAdriatico inAdriaiico only only found found that that the defendant's 4 4 two LWOP L WOPsentences sentences as as to tohis hisAttempted AttemptedAggravated AggravatedMurder Murdercharges chargeswarranted warranted correction, correction, 5 because "[a]t because "[ a]t the of his sentencing, the time of Guamlaw sentencing, Guam lawdid didnot notpermit permitLLWOP forattempted WOP for attempted aggravated 6 7 7 murder." murder." People v. v. Adriatico, Adriatico, 2024 Guam ,r 1.1. Although Adriatico vacated Guam 77 11 vacated the defendant's defendant's

8 8 judgment in CFO judgment CF0116-84 as to 116-84 as to the the Attempted Attempted Aggravated Aggravated Murder charges, charges, it did not vacate his his

9 9 other LWOP WOP sentences sentences for for the the Aggravated Aggravated Murder Murder charge charge in in that that same case, case, as as well well as, the two

10 counts of of Aggravated Murder in Aggravated Murder in CF0085-83. Id. 1[69. CF0085-83. Id. ,r 11 While both While both Adriatico Adriaticoand and Tedtaotao Tedtaotao were were considered considered youthful youthful offenders offenders at at the time of their 12 12

13 13 convictions, the the court does does not not find find that thataaLLWOP WOP sentence for Aggravated sentence for Aggravated Murder was an an illegal illegal

14 14 sentence at the sentence at thetime time of of their convictions. Although Although the the Defendant Defendant in in this this case believes believes that that the

1155 Adriatico opinion opinion can can be firmly firmlyapplied appliedtotohis hiscase, case,the nature of thenature ofthe the charges charges that that led led to to the the Guam Guam 16 16 Supreme Court's vacation Supreme Court's vacation of Adriatico's Adriatico's judgment judgment isisnot notthe thesame sameasasDefendant Defendant Tedtaotao. Tedtaotao. 17 17 I

Therefore, the court Ends that court finds thatDefendant DefendantTedtaotao's Tedtaotao'sLWOP LWOP sentence for Aggravated sentence for Aggravated Murder Murder 18 18

19 19 does not warrant resentencing. resentencing.

20 20 \\ 21 \\ 22 \\ 23 2244 \\\ 25 25 \\\\ 2266 \\\ 2277 \\\ 228 8 \\\

Decision Decision &&Order Order Re. Re. Amended Amended Motion Motionfor forCompassionate Compassionate Release, Motion for Release; Motion for Resentencing Resentencing People People v. Tedtaotao, CF0239-85, CF0239-85; CF0058-86, CF0058-86; CF0097-86, CF0097-86; CF0194-90, CF0194-90; CF0214-91, CF0214-91; CF0570-96 Page 9 of 10 10 CONCLUSION 1

2 For the reasons above, the court hereby DENIES the Defendant's Amended for Motion for Amended Motion

3 Compassionate Release and alternative Motion for Resentencing. 4

5 this ORDERED this SO ORDERED APR o07 2025 APR ----------- 6

10 ORABLE ALBERTO E. TOLENTINO 11 11 Judge, Superior Court of Guam

12 12

14 14

15 15

16 16

17 17

18 18

19 19

20 20

24 24

25 25

Decision Decision & Order Order Re. Amended Amended Motion Motion for for Compassionate Compassionate Release, Release; Motion Motion for for Resentencing Resentencing People People v. Tedtaotao, Tedtaotao, CF0239-85; CF0239-85; CF0058-86; CF0058-86; CF0097-86; CF0097-86; CF0194-90; CFOI94-90, CF0214-91; CF0570-96 Page 10 10 10 oflO