People v. Vidaurri

Opinion

FI LED CLERK OF COURT 2D25 JUL 15 JIM II: 07 2 SUPERIOR COURT 3 OFGUJl.Mt:{. 4

5 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM 6

7 THE PEOPLE OF GUAM, CRIMINAL CASE NO. CF0919-25 8 Plaintiff, 9 V. DECISION AND ORDER 10

11 MICHAEL JUNIOR VIDAURRI,

12 Defendant. 13 INTRODUCTION 14 This motion asks whether umelated misdemeanor and violation offenses may be joine 15 with felony charges in a single indictment under Guam law. Defendant Michael Junior Vidaurri, 16 represented by Attorney Jacob Wagner, moves to dismiss Charges Three and Four of th 17

18 Indictment. The People of Guam, represented by Assistant Attorney General Neil Bonavita,

19 oppose. The Court agrees with Defendant. Guam's statutory framework permits joinder on! 20 where misdemeanors are related to a felony. Where, as here, the charged offenses arise fro 21 separate incidents with no factual connection, joinder is improper.

22

23 BACKGROUND

24 On December 18, 2025, the People of Guam initiated this case by filing a Magistrate's 25

26 Complaint charging Defendant with Terrorizing, Assault, Eluding a Police Officer, an

27 Operating a Vehicle Without Proof of Required Registration. Magistrate's Comp!. at 1-3 (Dec.

Decision and Order CF0919-25 The People of Guam v. Michael Junior Vidaurri

18, 2025). The Complaint alleged that, between February 14, 2025 and February 26, 2025,

2 Defendant threatened and assaulted victim. Id. at 1-2.

3 The Affidavit further described a separate incident occurring on December l 6, 2025, 4 when Guam Police Department officers attempted to conduct a traffic stop on a vehicle operate 5 by Defendant. Id. at 1-2. According to the Affidavit, Vidaurri failed to stop when signaled b 6 police and continued driving through multiple roadways before ultimately stopping on 7

8 residential street. Id. at 2. Officers detained Vidaurri and, following a search of the vehicle,

9 recovered ammunition, firearm components, and suspected drug paraphernalia. Id. IO On December 23, 2025, a grand jury returned an Indictment charging Defendant with II four offenses: (1) Terrorizing, as a third-degree felony; (2) Assault, as a misdemeanor; (3)

12

13 Eluding a Police Officer, as a misdemeanor; and (4) Operating a Vehicle Without Proof o

14 Required Registration, as a violation. Indictment at 1-2 (Dec. 23, 2025). The Indictment alleges 15 that the Terrorizing and Assault charges arose from conduct occurring between February 14 an 16 February 26, 2025, involving victim. Id. at 1-2. It further alleges that the Eluding an 17 Registration charges arose from conduct occurring on December 16, 2025. Id. at 2.

18

19 On March 26, 2026, Defendant, filed a motion to dismiss Charges Three and Four of th

20 Indictment, arguing that those charges are unrelated to the felony charge and were improper! 21 included in the Indictment. Specifically, the motion asserts that the alleged traffic-relate 22 offenses occurred approximately ten months after the conduct underlying the Terrorizing charg 23 and do not arise from the same act, transaction, or common scheme or plan. Id. at 3-6 .

24

25 On April 7, 2026, the People filed an opposition to the motion, contending that the gran

26 jury acted within its statutory authority in returning the Indictment and that Defendant has faile 27 to demonstrate any irregularity in the grand jury proceedings. People's Opp 'n to Def 's Mot. to

Decision and Order CF0919-25 The People of Guam v. Michael Junior Vidaurri

Dismiss at 2-4 (Apr. 7, 2026) . The People further argue that the grand jury's role is limited to

2 determining whether probable cause exists for each charged offense, and that any challenge to

3 joinder does not undermine the validity of the Indictment. Id. at 3-4. 4

5 DISCUSSION

6 The Court resolves this motion in two steps. First, the Court examines the statutory 7 limits on joinder under 8 GCA § 1.15. Second, the Court applies that standard to the facts 8 alleged in the Indictment and concludes that Charges Three and Four are unrelated to the felony 9

10 conduct and must be dismissed.

11 I. The Court Grants Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Charges Three and Four 12 Based on Improper Joinder of Unrelated Offenses.

13 Under 8 GCA § 1.15 any felony together with any related misdemeanor shall b 14 prosecuted by indictment, while any other offense shall be prosecuted by complaint. By its plai 15

16 language, Section I. 15 permits joinder of misdemeanor offenses in an indictment only wher

17 those offenses are related to the charged felony. The statute does not authorize the inclusion o 18 unrelated misdemeanor or violation offenses in a felony indictment.

19 Here, Charges One and Two arise from alleged conduct occurring between February 14, 20 2025 and February 26, 2025, involving allegations of terrorizing and assault against a name 21

22 victim. Indictment at 1-2 (Dec. 23, 2025). In contrast, Charges Three and Four arise from a

23 entirely separate incident on December 16, 2025, involving an alleged attempt to elude polic 24 during a traffic stop and operating a vehicle without proof of registration. Id. at 2. These latte 25 charges involve different conduct, a different date, different circumstances, and no overlap i 26

27 victims or factual nexus with the alleged February 2025 offenses. Nothing in the record suggest

28 that the December 2025 traffic-related offenses are part of the same act or transaction, or part o

Page 3 ofS

Decision and Order CF0919-25 The People of Guam v. Michael Junior Vidaurri

a common scheme or plan, as the February 2025 alleged offenses. On these facts, Charges Thre

2 and Four cannot be deemed "related misdemeanors" within the meaning of 8 GCA § 1. 15.

3 The People argue that the grand jury possesses broad authority to investigate and retu 4 indictments, citing In re Application of the People of Guam, 2024 Guam, 16. That proposition i 5 not in dispute. The Guam Supreme Court has made clear that a grand jury retains broa 6 investigatory authority and may inquire into potential criminal conduct without first identifying 7

8 specific charge. In re Application of the People of Guam, 2024 Guam 16, 77-78. However, tha

9 authority pertains to the scope of investigation it does not expand the statutory limits governin IO what charges may properly be joined in a single indictment.

II Section 1.15 reflects a clear legislative limitation: only felonies and their relate 12

13 misdemeanors may be prosecuted together by indictment. 8 GCA § 1.15. To read the statut

14 otherwise would render the term "related" meaningless and permit the joinder of wholl 15 unrelated offenses, contrary to the statutory scheme.

16 Accordingly, while the grand jury acted within its authority to investigate and retu 17 charges supported by probable cause, the inclusion of Charges Three and Four in the sam 18

19 Indictment as Charges One and Two was improper. Because those charges are unrelated to th

20 felony-based conduct alleged in Charges One and Two, they must be prosecuted separately. 21 For these reasons, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Charges Three and Four 22 GRANTED.

23

24

25

26

Decision and Order CF09 l 9-25 The People of Guam v. Michael Junior Vidaurri

CONCLUSION

2 Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Charges Three and Four is GRANTED.

3

4

5 JUL 1 5 2026 IT IS SO ORDERED - - - - - - - - - -

6

7

8

9

IO HONORABLE ARTHUR R. BARCINAS Judge, Superior Court of Guam 11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 Sll!R.\!ICE VIA E!-MAII.

24 ac~now•edg., tf1dl a,. .. 1ec1<on1t Coll~ ot 11\e o••&·"a• ... u e m11, 1ed 10

25 A&'S L. YM-U.. 26

27 Oepuly ,1erk. \uperoor (oun o! Guam •