I . FILED SUPERIOR COURT l n OF GUAM I
2 I zo22 DEc 19 `PI11 l=2B 3 CLERKUFCOURT I 4 Fm 5 I
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0207-22 9
vs. 10 DECISION AND ORDER
JOLEEN MARIE TOPASNA, 12
Defendant. 13
14 INTRODUCTION IS This matter is before the Honorable Vemon P. Perez on September 9, 2022, for hearing 16 I
on Defendant JOLEEN MARIE TOPASNA's ("Defendant") Motion to Suppress. Present were I? Defendant with counsel, William B. Pole, and Assistant Attorney General Yusuke Haffeman- 18 Udagawa on behalf of the People of Guam ("the Government"). Having reviewed the pleadings, 19 i the arguments presented, and the record, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order. 20 BACKGROUND 21 On April 14, 2022, Defendant was indicted with the following charges: (l) Theft of 22 Property (As a Third Degree Felony), (2) Possession of a Schedule II Controlled Substance (As 23 a Third Degree Felony); and (3) Assault (As a Misdemeanor). (Indictment, Apr. 14, 2022). The 24 two third degree felony charges also have an attached Notice: Commission of a Felony While on 25 Felony Release. Id. These charges stem from allegations occumlng on two separate occasions. I 26 The assault and theft charges stem from an incident occurring on or about December 2, 2021, 2? whereby Defendant allegedly shoved Casie Laurie Sholing against a wall, punched her in the 28
People v. Topasna I
Case No. CF0207-22 I Decision and Order
I
Page 1 of 5 I I
I I I
1 face, and stole her cell phone. (Decl. of Katherine Nepton, Magistrate's Con pl., Apr. 5, 2022).
2 The possession charge stems form the discovery of suspected methamphetamine during Guam I 3 I Police Department's response to a traffic crash in Tamuning on or about April 4, 2022. Id. I
4 On June 21, 2022, Defendant filed the instant motion, moving the Court to suppress I 5 Iphysical evidence. seized on April 4, 2022. On August 12, 2022, the Government filed its
6 I Opposition, and on August l'7, 2022, Defendant filed her Reply. I 7 On September 9, 2022, the Court heard sworn testimony from GPD Officer Aren Fabila I
s ("Officer Fabila"). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court gave the parties leave to tile I
9 proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. On September 23, 2022, Defendant filed her
10 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and on October 19, 2022, the Government
11 filed its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. n 12 I At the Suppression Hearing, the Court ascertained the following facts:
13 l. Around 8:09 p.m., Officer Fabila arrived to the scene fan accident by the Archbishop
14 . Flores loop in Turf on. The accident appeared to be a head on collision where one of .
15 the vehicles veered off and went on to an oncoming lane and collided with another
16 vehicle.
IT 2. On his arrival, Officer Fabila checked on the occupants of one of the vehicles and
18 I waited for Guam Fire and Medias to conduct an injury check. I 19 | 3. The sole occupant of the other vehicle, a pickup truck, was not present at the scene . I
20 because she had been transported to Guam Memorial Hospital ("GMH") prior to
21 Officer Fabiia's an'ival.
22 I 4. Officer Fabila testified that GPD tried to get in contact with the registered owner of
23 the pickup truck. The registered owner ended up walking to the scene about an hour
24 later and said the driver was his friend Joleen Topasna.
25 5. Prior to this, the only information Officer Fabila had about the driver was that her first I I 26 name was Joleen. The officers who had been present with the medics indicated her |
2? first name was Joleen. I I 28 I I People v. Topasna I Case No. CF0207-22 Decision and Order
Page 2 of 5 I | n I
1 6. Officer Fabila was told Joleen was unconscious when she was transported to GMI-I.
2 | Officer Fabila was unaware if her person was searched for identification. Officer
3 Fabila was never asked by an EMT to search for her driver's license. , I 4 . 7. Officer Fabila testified that he and Officer Suniagaysay both searched the vehicle I
5 looking for identification. Officer Fabila testified that identification is often found in
6 I items such as a backpack or wallet.
7 8. Officer Sumagaysay found a black shoulder bag in the front passenger seat. No I s identification was found in the black shoulder bag.
9 9. Officer Fabila found a backpack behind the driver' s seat. In the backpack were scales
10 and an empty baggie. While continuing to search, he found another bag that contained
suspected methamphetamine. No identification was found in the backpack. I
12 10. Officer Fabila testified 'that once he found the suspected methamphetamines, he
13 stopped searching the vehicle. Officer Fabila then tested and secured the suspected
14 methamphetamine. n I 15 ll. At some point later on, GMH was called and told the name of the driver. Officer
16 Fabila could not remer er when exactly GPD provided GMH Defendant's identity. H DISCUSSION IT
18 The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution "protects against unreasonable searches |
19 i and seizures and is made applicable to Guam via section 1421 lb)(c) of the Organic Act of Guam."
20 People v. Cha rgualaf, 2001 Guam 1 1114 (internal citations omitted). "A search or seizure made
21 without a warrant is presumed to be unreasonable. In the absence of a warrant, the police may
22 lawfully conduct a search or seizure only if an exception to the warrant requirement applies." Id. II 23 "One exigency obviating the requirement of a warrant is the need to assist persons who are
24 seriously injured or threatened with such injury. The need to protect or preserve life or avoid
25 serious injury is justification for what would be otherwise illegal absent an exigency or
26 I emergency." Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398, 403 (2006) (internal quotation marks | 2? omitted). "An action is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual
28 'officer's state of mind, as long as the circumstances, viewedobjectively, justify the action. The |
People v. Topasna CaseNo. CF0207-22 Decision and Order I
I Page 3 of 5 I
I I
1 I officer's subjective motivation is irrelevant." Id, at 404-05 (internal quotation marks and citations
2 omitted) (alteration in original). "To determine whether a law enforcement officer faced an
3 emer gency t ha t ju s t ified a ct ing Wit hou t a wa r r a nt , [t he cou r t ] looks t o t he t ot a lit y of
4 circumstances." Missouri v. McNee!y, 569 U.S. 141, 149 (2013) (citations omitted).
5 In this case, by the time Officer Fabila appeared on the scene of the accident, Defendant :
6 was not present as she had already been transported to GMH for medical treatment. Although
7 Officer Fabila testified that Defendant was unconscious, he did not personally see her or respond
s to her. No testimony was provided by any officer or Medical personnel who was present at the I 9 scene with Defendant as to how she was found in the vehicle and her medical status. No testimony
10 was provided indicating that the EMTs requested GPD to search the vehicle for Deflendant's I identification or for any information regarding her medical history, nor was any testimony
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
I . FILED SUPERIOR COURT l n OF GUAM I
2 I zo22 DEc 19 `PI11 l=2B 3 CLERKUFCOURT I 4 Fm 5 I
6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0207-22 9
vs. 10 DECISION AND ORDER
JOLEEN MARIE TOPASNA, 12
Defendant. 13
14 INTRODUCTION IS This matter is before the Honorable Vemon P. Perez on September 9, 2022, for hearing 16 I
on Defendant JOLEEN MARIE TOPASNA's ("Defendant") Motion to Suppress. Present were I? Defendant with counsel, William B. Pole, and Assistant Attorney General Yusuke Haffeman- 18 Udagawa on behalf of the People of Guam ("the Government"). Having reviewed the pleadings, 19 i the arguments presented, and the record, the Court now issues the following Decision and Order. 20 BACKGROUND 21 On April 14, 2022, Defendant was indicted with the following charges: (l) Theft of 22 Property (As a Third Degree Felony), (2) Possession of a Schedule II Controlled Substance (As 23 a Third Degree Felony); and (3) Assault (As a Misdemeanor). (Indictment, Apr. 14, 2022). The 24 two third degree felony charges also have an attached Notice: Commission of a Felony While on 25 Felony Release. Id. These charges stem from allegations occumlng on two separate occasions. I 26 The assault and theft charges stem from an incident occurring on or about December 2, 2021, 2? whereby Defendant allegedly shoved Casie Laurie Sholing against a wall, punched her in the 28
People v. Topasna I
Case No. CF0207-22 I Decision and Order
I
Page 1 of 5 I I
I I I
1 face, and stole her cell phone. (Decl. of Katherine Nepton, Magistrate's Con pl., Apr. 5, 2022).
2 The possession charge stems form the discovery of suspected methamphetamine during Guam I 3 I Police Department's response to a traffic crash in Tamuning on or about April 4, 2022. Id. I
4 On June 21, 2022, Defendant filed the instant motion, moving the Court to suppress I 5 Iphysical evidence. seized on April 4, 2022. On August 12, 2022, the Government filed its
6 I Opposition, and on August l'7, 2022, Defendant filed her Reply. I 7 On September 9, 2022, the Court heard sworn testimony from GPD Officer Aren Fabila I
s ("Officer Fabila"). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court gave the parties leave to tile I
9 proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. On September 23, 2022, Defendant filed her
10 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and on October 19, 2022, the Government
11 filed its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. n 12 I At the Suppression Hearing, the Court ascertained the following facts:
13 l. Around 8:09 p.m., Officer Fabila arrived to the scene fan accident by the Archbishop
14 . Flores loop in Turf on. The accident appeared to be a head on collision where one of .
15 the vehicles veered off and went on to an oncoming lane and collided with another
16 vehicle.
IT 2. On his arrival, Officer Fabila checked on the occupants of one of the vehicles and
18 I waited for Guam Fire and Medias to conduct an injury check. I 19 | 3. The sole occupant of the other vehicle, a pickup truck, was not present at the scene . I
20 because she had been transported to Guam Memorial Hospital ("GMH") prior to
21 Officer Fabiia's an'ival.
22 I 4. Officer Fabila testified that GPD tried to get in contact with the registered owner of
23 the pickup truck. The registered owner ended up walking to the scene about an hour
24 later and said the driver was his friend Joleen Topasna.
25 5. Prior to this, the only information Officer Fabila had about the driver was that her first I I 26 name was Joleen. The officers who had been present with the medics indicated her |
2? first name was Joleen. I I 28 I I People v. Topasna I Case No. CF0207-22 Decision and Order
Page 2 of 5 I | n I
1 6. Officer Fabila was told Joleen was unconscious when she was transported to GMI-I.
2 | Officer Fabila was unaware if her person was searched for identification. Officer
3 Fabila was never asked by an EMT to search for her driver's license. , I 4 . 7. Officer Fabila testified that he and Officer Suniagaysay both searched the vehicle I
5 looking for identification. Officer Fabila testified that identification is often found in
6 I items such as a backpack or wallet.
7 8. Officer Sumagaysay found a black shoulder bag in the front passenger seat. No I s identification was found in the black shoulder bag.
9 9. Officer Fabila found a backpack behind the driver' s seat. In the backpack were scales
10 and an empty baggie. While continuing to search, he found another bag that contained
suspected methamphetamine. No identification was found in the backpack. I
12 10. Officer Fabila testified 'that once he found the suspected methamphetamines, he
13 stopped searching the vehicle. Officer Fabila then tested and secured the suspected
14 methamphetamine. n I 15 ll. At some point later on, GMH was called and told the name of the driver. Officer
16 Fabila could not remer er when exactly GPD provided GMH Defendant's identity. H DISCUSSION IT
18 The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution "protects against unreasonable searches |
19 i and seizures and is made applicable to Guam via section 1421 lb)(c) of the Organic Act of Guam."
20 People v. Cha rgualaf, 2001 Guam 1 1114 (internal citations omitted). "A search or seizure made
21 without a warrant is presumed to be unreasonable. In the absence of a warrant, the police may
22 lawfully conduct a search or seizure only if an exception to the warrant requirement applies." Id. II 23 "One exigency obviating the requirement of a warrant is the need to assist persons who are
24 seriously injured or threatened with such injury. The need to protect or preserve life or avoid
25 serious injury is justification for what would be otherwise illegal absent an exigency or
26 I emergency." Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398, 403 (2006) (internal quotation marks | 2? omitted). "An action is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, regardless of the individual
28 'officer's state of mind, as long as the circumstances, viewedobjectively, justify the action. The |
People v. Topasna CaseNo. CF0207-22 Decision and Order I
I Page 3 of 5 I
I I
1 I officer's subjective motivation is irrelevant." Id, at 404-05 (internal quotation marks and citations
2 omitted) (alteration in original). "To determine whether a law enforcement officer faced an
3 emer gency t ha t ju s t ified a ct ing Wit hou t a wa r r a nt , [t he cou r t ] looks t o t he t ot a lit y of
4 circumstances." Missouri v. McNee!y, 569 U.S. 141, 149 (2013) (citations omitted).
5 In this case, by the time Officer Fabila appeared on the scene of the accident, Defendant :
6 was not present as she had already been transported to GMH for medical treatment. Although
7 Officer Fabila testified that Defendant was unconscious, he did not personally see her or respond
s to her. No testimony was provided by any officer or Medical personnel who was present at the I 9 scene with Defendant as to how she was found in the vehicle and her medical status. No testimony
10 was provided indicating that the EMTs requested GPD to search the vehicle for Deflendant's I identification or for any information regarding her medical history, nor was any testimony
12 provided as to how the EMTs ardor GPD on the scene prior to Officer Fabila's arrival became
13 aware of Deflendant's first name. See, e.g., United States v. Dunavan, 485 F.2d 201 (6tl1 Cir.
14 1973) (upholding search when driver was foaming at the mouth and unable to talk and officer was
15 seeking information explaining nature of the defendant's condition and the best means of treating I 16 it), Com. v. McCarthy, 884 N.E.2d 991, 994 (Mass. App. 2008) (upholding search where officer
17 "did not search the defendant's bag until the EMTs attempted to administer treatment to the
is defendant, noted that the defendant appeared to be suffering firm a drug overdose, and asked [the I
19 officer] whether he knew what the defendant had taken."), Evans v. State, 364 So.2d 93 (Fla. Dist.
20 Ct. App. 19TH) (holding officer lawfully searched purse for medical information that would
21 account for driver's condition of being unable to communicate in any way). Officer Fabila was
22 I a ls o not a b le t o t es t ify a s t o whet her or not Defenda nt 's p er s on ha d b een s ea r ched for 23 identification prior to research of the vehicle. Therefore, based upon the information before the
24 Court at this time, it cannot be said that GPD's action of searching the vehicle was reasonably
25 tailored to their attempts to aid emergency medical personnel in rendering appropriate care and
26 t r ea t ment t o Defenda nt . See Mfncey v. Ar izona , 437 U. S . 385, 393 (1978) ("a
27 I warrantless search must be strictly circumscribed by the exigencies which justify its initiation) .
28 I I
People v. Topastw Case No. cF0207-22 I Decision and Order
Page 4 off I
I I V
I l CONCLUSION 2 For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion to Suppress. Parties I 3 shall return for a Pre-Trial Conference on December 20, 2022 at 9:30 a.m.
4 IT IS so ORDERED this day of December, 2022. 5 I 6
s HONORABLE VERNON p. PEREZ Judge, Superior Court of Guam 9
I 10
.I 12
13 I
14 m 15
17 I I I
19 n 20
26 I 27
28 I
I I People v. Topasna | Case No. CF0207-22 Decision and Order I
I I Page 5 of f