aaw
* 5run -3ll "E E •r
4
!8=v9
*-no 51:1
rr
1 y".
» "». z u . .|
¢*-. 4 3 ¥
2 2% PHE? -is f=HiI=H 3 ._ as'
s
4 .:~ . #ea f A
Q ? *;. *§+f° ...=3
5
6 IN THE SUPERIOR SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM
7
8 PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE
CASE NO.
no. CF0557-24
CF0557-24
9 vs.
10 DECISION AND ORDER II DAVID YID QUICHOCHO UNCANGCO, JR.
12 12 FRANCES JANET SAHAGON CRUZ, 13 13 Defendants.
14
15 15 INTRODUCTION
16 This This matter
matter came before the
came before theHonorable
Honorable Vernon
Vernon P. Perez on August August 12,
12, 2025, for hearing
17 17 on Defendant Frances FrancesJanet
JanetSahagon
SahagonCruz's
Cruz's("Cruz")
("Cruz") Motion
Motion to Reconsider to the theDenial
Denial of Her
18 Motion Motionto to Disqualify
DisqualifySpecial
SpecialAssistant
AssistantAttorney
AttorneyGeneral
General Curtis
Curtis Van
Van de
de veld.
veld. Present
Present were
were Cruz
19 with with counsel, counsel, Terry E. Timblin, Timblin, Co-Defendant
Co-Defendant David
David Quichocho
Quichocho Uncangco,
Uncangco, Jr.
Jr. ("Uncangco")
("Uncangco")
20 20 with with counsel, counsel, Assistant Alternate Public Public Defender
Defender Tyler
TylerScott,
Scott, and
and Assistant
Assistant Attorney General General
21 Dante Dante CH CH Harootunian
Harootunian on behalf of
of the People of Guam Government"). Having reviewed Guam ("the Government").
22 the pleadings, the arguments pleadings, the presented,and arguments presented, andthe therecord,
record,the
theCourt
Courtnow
nowissue_s
issuesthe
thefollowing
following
23 23 Decision Decision and and Order.
24 24 BACKGROUND
25 25 Defendants Defendants face charges
charges stemming from alleged events stemming from between March and events occurring between and
26 26 June of 2024.
2024. (Superseding Indictment, Oct.
(Superseding Indictment, Oct. 1, l, 2024). Uncangco
Uncangco is
is charged
charged with
with (1)
(1) Possession
27 27 of of a Schedule II Controlled Controlled Substance with Intent Substance with Intentto
toDeliver
Deliver (As a First
First Degree Felony);
Felony); (2)
(2)Retail
Retail
28 28 Theft Theft (As (As aa Second Degree
Degree Felony)-
Felony) Four Counts, (3) Attempted Counts; (3) AttemptedTheft Theftby
byReceiving
Receiving (As
(As aaThird
Third
People v.
v. Uncangeo & Cruz
Uncangco &
Case No.
No. CF0557-24
Decision Decision and and Order
Page 11 of6
1 Degree Felony)-Two Degree Felony) Counts; (4) Fraudulent Use of .- Two Counts, License Plate (As a Third of a License Degree Felony);
Third Degree Felony),
t
2 (5) Witness Bribery (As ThirdDegree (As aa Third Felony), and DegreeFelony); (6)Tampering and(6) withaaWitness.
Tamperingwith Witness.Id. Cruz is Id Cruz
3 charged with (l) Conspiracy to Commit (1) Conspiracy Theft by Receiving Commit Theft (As aa Second Receiving (As Degree Felony);
Second Degree (2)
Felony); (2)
4 Felony); and (3) Conspiracy in Tampering with a Witness Witness Bribery (As a Third Degree Felony),
1
5 (As a Misdemeanor).
Misdemeanor).l Id.
Id .
6 24, 2025, On February 24, the Court 2025, the denied the defendants' Motion Court denied to Disqualify Motion to Curtis C.
Disqualify Curtis
7 veld as Van De veld Special Assistant as Special standing to Assistant Attorney General, finding that they did not have standing
8 under Guam Rules of bring the Motion under Professional Conduct of Professional 1.7 because no attorney/client Conduct Rule 1.7
9 relationship existed relationship between the existed between defendants and the defendants Attorney Van and Attorney de veld.
Van de Dec. &
See Dec.
veld. See Order, Feb.
& Order,
10 24, 2025.
II On June 30, 2025, June 30, filed a Motion to 2025, Cruz filed Reconsider the Denial of Her Motion to Reconsider to Motion to
12 12 Attorney General Disqualify Special Assistant Attorney Curtis Van General Curtis develd Van de ("Motion to veld ("Motion Reconsider"). On to Reconsider").
113 July 16, the Government filed its Opposition. On 16, 2025, the July 23, On July 2025, Cruz filed her Reply.
23, 2025,
14 14 On August 12, 2025, the 12, 2025, Court heard the Court arguments on heard arguments the Motion on the to Reconsider.
Motion to Reconsider. At the
15 15 hearing, Uncangco hearing, orally joined Uncangco orally the Motion to Reconsider.
joined the After hearing Reconsider. After arguments from the hearing arguments
16 16 parties, the Court placed the Court the matter placed the under advisement.
matter under advisement.
17 17 DISCUSSION
18 The Local Rules of the Superior Court of Guam Court of provide that Guam provide motion may be renewed that aa motion
19 19 only on the grounds of:
20 20 (1) fact or law from that presented to the court before such in fact
1) aa material difference in decision that in the exercise of decision reasonable diligence of reasonable not have diligence could not been known have been known
21 to the party moving for reconsideration reconsideration at of such decision, or, at the time of
22 22 (2) the the emergence
emergence of newmaterial ofnew facts or material facts change of or aa change of law the time law occurring after tµe
of such decision, or, of
23 23 (3) a manifest showing of manifest showing ofaa failure to consider facts presented to the Court material facts
consider material
24 24 before such decision. 25 25 No motion oral or repeat any oral
shall in any manner repeat reconsideration shall
for reconsideration
motion for written or written
26 of or in opposition to the original motion.
argument made in support of
27
28 the Superseding Indictment.
11 These Seven through.
Charges Seven as Charges
charges are reflected as
These charges of the Nine of
through.Nine Indictment.
People v.
v. Uncangco & Cruz
Uncangco &
Case No. CF0557-24 Decision Decision and
and Order
Page 2 of6
of
1 Local Rule Rule CRI.l(d).
cR1.1(d); .
2 Here, defendants defendants move Court to the Court
move the reconsiderits to reconsider February24, itsFebruary 2025 Decision 24, 2025 and
Decisionand~Order
3 pursuant pursuant totoCRl.l(d)(2). arguethat Defendantsargue
CRl.l(d)(2). Defendants since the thatsince Decisionissued, the Decision new evidence issued, new has evidence has
4 the disclosure emerged, specifically, the betweenthe disclosure of the Contract between Office of the Attorney General theOffice
5 and Attorney veld ("the Van de veld
AttoMey Van Contract"). (Mot.
("the Contract"). Reconsideratat2,2,Jun.
(Mot.Reconsider 30, 2025).
Jun. 30, Further, on 2025). Further,
6 June 2025, Judge 23, 2025,
June 23, JohnTerlaje JudgeJohn issued aa decision in People v.
Terlaje issued Reyes, Criminal v. Reyes, Case No.
Criminal Case
7 CF0723-24-01, requiring the CF0723-24-01, requiring disqualification of the disqualification Van de Attorney Van of Attorney veldfrom de veld prosecuting that fromprosecuting case that case
8 in light of the Contract.
of the See Mot. Reconsider, Contract. See OrderininCF0723-24-0l, Reconsider, Exh. B (Dec.&&Order Jun. 23, CF0723-24-01,Jun.
9 2025).
2025). The The Government
Government opposes, arguing that opposes, arguing (1) the that(1) motion fails the motion reason for state aa reason
fails to state
10 10 reconsideration, Judge Terlaje's reconsideration; (2) Judge decisionisisno Terlaje's decision longerapplicable nolonger because the applicablebecause language found the language
11 . to require disqualification in the disqualification in Contract no the Contract longerexists no longer pursuant to a First Amendment to the existspursuant
12 12 Contract, Judge Terlaje's Contract; (3) Judge erroneous; (4)
decision was erroneous,
Terlaje's decision cannot claim (4) Cruz cannot efforts to resolve claim efforts
13 undertaken,(5)
charges have not been undertaken; the procedural (5) the history of proceduralhistory Reyes is distinguishable from the of Reyes
14 instant matter, and instant matter; and(6) Court should the Court
(6) the notengage shouldnot in aa fishing engage in to the confidential fishing expedition as to
15 ·15 relationship between relationship theOAG betweenthe and SAAG
OAG and no standing as no
SAAG as exists for such standing exists inquiry and such inquiry is
and it is
16 irrelevant. See See generally, Opp'n,
Opp'n, Jul
Jul 16, 2025.
16, 2025. .
17 17 Reyes, Judge v. Reyes,
People v. In People In granted the Terlaje granted
Judge Terlaje Motion to theMotion Disqualify based to Disqualify based on (1) Attorney on(1)
18 18 interestin financialinterest
veld'sfinancial
Van de veld's Van casesto bringingcases inbringing trialpursuant totrial to the
pursuant to Contractand the Contract (2)Attorney and(2) Attorney
19 19 Van de de veld's
veld'spresentation evidence during ofevidence
presentation of grand jury during grand proceedings in jury proceedings that Matter.
in that See
matter. See
20 20 generally, Exh. B.
Reconsider, Exp.
generally, Mot. Reconsider, Thereisisno B. There allegationininthe noallegation instant matter theinstant that Attorney matter that
21 in grand Van de veld participated in juryproceedings grandjury orin proceedingsor thecharging inthe ofthis
chargingof case.Accordingly, thiscase. Accordingly,
22 22 the Court's review is limited review is to whether limitedto or not whether or the provisions not the in the provisions in Contract require Attorney the Contract
23 23. Van Van dh veld's disqualification de veld's from this disqualification from matter.
this matter.
24 Section of the Contract sets Section 3 of forth in sets forth relevant part in relevant thefollowing:
partthe following:
25 25 3.1 agrees to The OAG agrees
3.1 The compensateLEGAL to compensate CONSULANT at orate LEGAL CONSULANT a rate of three ofthree
thousand and 00/100dollars and00/100 ($3,000.00)per dollars($3,000.00) monthper permonth assignedcase perassigned forproviding case'fm; providing ..
26 26 the the services forth in set forth
services set Section 1.1. The OAG in Section agrees to compensate LEGAL OAG agrees to compensate LEGAL -
27 27 CONSULTANT CONSULTANT twelve
twelve thousandand 00/100 dollars ($l2,000.00) in any month in thousand and 00/100 dollars ($12,000.00) in any month 28 28
People v. Uncangco & Cruz v. Uncangco
Case No.
No. CF0557-24
Decision Decision and and Order
Page 3 of6
which LEGAL
LEGAL CONSULTANT
CONSULTANTisis trying
tryingaa case,
case, regardless
regardless of
of what other
other cases may
1 be assigned to
to LEGAL
LEGAL CONSULTANT.
2 3.2 In any
any particular
particular month,
month, LEGAL CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT agreesagrees that that their
their entire
entire
3 compensation for any and all matters shall not exceed twelve thousand and 00/100 4 dollars ($12,000.00)
($l2,000.00) a month. LEGAL LEGAL CONSULTANT
CONSULTANTshall shall be be responsible
responsible for
for all
resulting taxes, insurance costs;
costs, and other fees associated with the practice ofof law.
5 A quality control assessment of thethe work product will be reviewed and approved 6 by the Appointing Appointing Authority other designee Authority or other designee before before payment
payment is is made
made on the
contract.
7 (Mot. Reconsider, Reconsider, Exh.
Exh. A).
A). Judge
JudgeTerlaje
Terlaje found
found that
that based
based on
on the
the Contract,
Contract, "Mr. Van dh
de veld
8 has a financial financial interest in bringing cases where he he acts
acts as
as special
special prosecutor
prosecutor to trial"
trial" as "this
9 contract promises a possibility of an additional $9,000 in the event that Mr.
Mr. Van de veld takes a
10 case to to trial."
trial." (Mot. Reconsider, Exh. B). Judge Judge Terlaje
Terlaje determined
determined that
that "[t]his
"[t]his personal, financial II interest in taking cases to trial trial necessarily
necessarily conflicts with the notion of of pursuing justice, which is 12 the role role of prosecutor." Id.
of aa prosecutor." Id
13
issued, the Contract
Since Judge Terlaje's Decision issued, Contract between Attorney Van dh de veld and
14 the Office of the the Attorney General was
was amended
amended as follows:
15 Sections 3.1
3.1 and 3.2
3.2 of the Agreement are
are deleted
deleted in
in their
their entirety
entirety and
and replaced
replaced
16 following:
with the following:
17 17 3.11 The O OAG
AG aagrees
gr tto ccompensate
omp ens e L LEGAL CCONSULTANT O T AN T att a rratee of of
18 $12,000.00 per month for services rendered.
rendered. The services to be be rendered rendered by LEGAL
LEGAL
CONSULTANT are more completely described in in Section 1.1 of Section 1.1 of the Agreement.
19 LEGAL CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT isis responsible responsible for
for all
all resulting
resulting taxes,
taxes, insurance costs, and 20 other fees associated with the practice of law.
law. The
The Attorney
Attorney General or hishis designee designee
may propose assignment of of any case case to
to Attorney
Attorney and and Attorney Attorney agrees
agrees to
to accept
accept
21 assignment to cases or other duties as as may may be assigned to to Attorney by Appointing 22 Authority or his designee, for which Attorney does not not believe an an ethical
ethical conflict
23 exists, or otherwise
otherwise causes an
an ethics
ethics compliance
compliance issue.
24 (Opp'n, 'n, Exh.
Exh. 1).
1 The
The Government
Governmentsets
setsforth
forth that
that "[w]hi1e
"[w]hile not concurring in the decision of Judge
25 25 Terlaje in CF0734-24-01, the the parties determined to amend the contractual relationship to parties determined to remove remove
26 the language that Judge Terlaje determined determined created
created aa financial
financial incentive
incentive to
to take
take cases
cases to trial" and
27 that "[b]ased on these changed circumstances, the grounds for for disqualification no longer longer exist
exist as
28 28 determined by Judge Terlaje."
Terlaje." (Opp'n
(Opp'n at
at 3).
People v.
v. Uncangco
Uncangco && Cruz
Case No. CF0557-24 Case No. Decision Decision and and Order
Page 4 of6
of
1 At this time, the the Comi
Court also
also finds
finds that
thatthe
thechanged
changed circumstances
circumstances have
have removed
removed the ground
2 disqualification that for disqualification that was was previously
previously determined
determined by
by Judge
Judge Terlaje. The current Terlaje. The current state of the state of
3 Contract as amended does not not present
present a financial incentive for Attorney Van de veld veld to take cases
4 to trial.
trial. Defendants do not provide any additional authority beyond beyond Judge Terlaje's Decision and
5 support their Order to support their Motion. Therefore, the Court Motion. Therefore, Court finds finds no basis
basis to
to grant
grant the Motion
Motion for
for
6 Reconsideration on this ground.
7 Lastly, Cruz also also argues
argues that
that Attorney
Attorney van
van de
de veld's "approach to
veld's "approach to this
this case
case also
also reflects a
8 interest in lack of interest in settlement. ...He settlement.... Hemakes
makesititclear
clearthat
that he
he isis not
not making
making an
an offer
offer and
and invites
invites
9 CRUZ to plead guilty as charged." (Mot. Reconsider at 4). In response, 4). In response, the Government Government sets
sets
10 10 it's made forth the efforts it's made to to resolve
resolvethe
theinstant
instantmatter
matterand
andCnL1z's
Cruz's other
other criminal
criminal matter, CF0478-
II 24.2 (Opp'n 24.2 (Opp'n at at 5).
5). The
TheGovernment
Governmentfurther
further states
states that
that "[u]nder
"[u]nder the polices of the OAG and my 12 12 employment relationship employment relationship with the OAG, OAG, II do
do not
not exercise
exercise the
the discretion
discretion to
to approve
approve aa plea
plea offer
13 the internal processes of the without following the the OAG. Those decisions OAG. Those decisions are
are made
made to
to either
either approve
14 14 of a plea offer disposition and determine whether or disprove of whether or or not
not the
the case
case will
will result
result in
in trial.
trial.
15 15 Those decisions are not decisions are the purview not the purview of
of SAAG
SAAG to
to make."
make." Id at 6. TheCourt 6. The Courtfurther
further notes
notes that
that
16 16 under Guam law:
17 17 The attorney for the the government
government and the attorney for the defendant or the defendant when acting pro se may engage in may engage in discussions discussions with aa viewview toward toward reaching
reaching an
an
18 agreement that, agreement that, upon
upon the
the entering
enteringof
ofaaplea
pleaof
ofguilty
guiltyor
orpolo
nolocontenderen
contendere to a charged
19 19 offense or to a lesser or or related
related offense,
offense, the
the attorney
attorney for
for the
the government
government will
will move
20 for dismissal of other charges, charges, oror will
will recommend
recommend or not oppose the imposition of of particular sentence, a particular sentence, or will do both. The court court shall shall not participate
participate in any such
21 discussions.
22 22 99 GCA GCA §§ 60.80(a)
60.S0(a) (emphasis
(emphasis added).
added). Accordingly,
Accordingly, the
the Court
Court declines
declines at
at this
this time
time to
to further
further
23 address either party's pre-disposition for plea negotiations or settlement.
24 II//
25 II//
26
27
22 In In Criminal Criminal Case No. CF0478-24, CF0478-24, both
both defendants
defendants are charged with several felony offenses occurring on or about 28 July 6, 2024, including the death death of
of Joshua
Joshua Taitague. Indictment (CF0478-24), Taitague. See Indictment (CF0478-24), Jul. 18, 2024.
People v. Uncangco & v. Uncangco & Cruz
Case No. CF0557-24 Decision Decision and and Order
Page Page 55 of
of66
l CONCLUSION
2 2 For the the foregoing reasons, the foregoing reasons, hereby DENIES the Court hereby
the Court Motion for the Motion Reconsideration.
for Reconsideration.
3 Parties shall return for a Status Hearing on November 10, 2025 November 10, at 3:30 p.m.
2025 at
4 IT IS SO ORDERED this41"
this41tt day ofNovember, 2025.
November, 2025.
5
6
7
8 HONORABLE HONORABLE VERNON
VERNON p. PEREZ
P. PEREZ
Judge, Guam Judge, Superior Court of Guam 9
10
11
12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18
19 19
20 20
21 senvlce Sl!ltVICI!VIA
VIAI:-anAIL
l!-MAIL
ii acknowledge
acknowleel'ge that
that gr
en eleclvomc
eiect,om<
22 Cony Co°" av the Ovvgma'
ohhe o,,g,ria• was
wa\ e 'walled ro
ma,lec:J to
/05 I ,4llf'iJ, /16, f'D/
23 23 TM/»n
24 Date H/av/25 he. Il'taZq Il151.,¢ 6 M M 25 Deputy clerk Superior Deputy ,:lerk.. ':lupt;-nor Lourl Lourt of
ot Guam
26 26
27 27
28
People v. Uncangco & v. Uncangco & Cruz
Case No. CF0557-24 Decision and Order Decision and
Page 66 of6 Page off