People of Guam v Castro [2002] GUSC 23; 2002 Guam 23 (27 November 2002)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

PEOPLE OF GUAM
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

FRANK RONALD CASTRO
Defendant-Appellee.

OPINION

Filed: November 27, 2002

Cite as: 2002 Guam 23

Supreme Court Case No.: CRA01-002
Superior Court Case No.: CF0324-98

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted on December 11, 2001
Hagåtña, Guam

For Plaintiff-Appellant: Gerad Egan Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 2-200E Guam Judicial Ctr. 120 W. O=Brien Dr. Hagåtña, Guam 96910

For Defendant-Appellee: Richard Parker Arens, Esq. Cunliffe & Cook, P.C. Suite 200 210 Archbishop F.C. Flores St. Hagåtña, Guam 96910

BEFORE: PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; and JOHN A. MANGLONA, Designated Justice.

CARBULLIDO, J.:

[1] The Defendant-Appellee Frank Ronald Castro (ACastro@) was convicted by a jury of one count of negligent homicide. Subsequent to entry of the verdict, the trial court granted Castro=s motion for new trial on the ground that there was a reasonable possibility that extraneous information before the jury could have possibly affected the verdict. The Plaintiff-Appellant People of Guam (AGovernment@) appeals the trial court=s grant of Castro=s motion for a new trial. Specifically, the Government argues that the trial court abused its discretion in conducting an evidentiary hearing on Castro=s motion and that, even if the evidentiary hearing was proper, the trial court abused its discretion in finding that the extraneous information before the jury could have affected the verdict. We reject the Government=s challenges and find that the trial court properly held a hearing and admitted juror testimony for the purpose of determining Castro=s motion, and did not abuse its discretion in granting Castro=s motion for a new trial. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court=s decision.

I.

[2] On May 6, 1998, Castro was indicted for manslaughter and the concomitant weapons possession special allegation, and criminal negligent homicide and the concomitant weapons possession special allegation. The case was tried before a jury. After the Government rested its case, Castro moved for judgment of acquittal on the manslaughter charge. The lower court granted the motion. The remaining counts were submitted to the jury. On December 22, 2000, the jury returned a guilty verdict as to the negligent homicide charge, but found that Castro was not guilty with regard to the special allegation. See Transcript, vol. IV, p. 120 (Trial, Dec. 22, 2000); Record on Appeal, tab 149 (Verdict Form, Dec. 21, 2000).

[3] After the verdict was rendered, Juror Number 8 sent a letter to the trial judge. See Appellant=s Excerpts of Record, pp. 4-6 (Letter from Juror, Jan. 3, 2001). The court provided counsel with a copy of the letter. In the letter, the juror made references to two facts: first, the fact that Christmas was a few days away and, second, that the original manslaughter charge was dropped. Based on the contents of this letter, Castro filed a motion for a new trial on the ground of juror misconduct.

[4] On January 26, 2001, the trial court conducted a sealed evidentiary hearing wherein the court accepted testimony from the jurors regarding the two facts identified in Juror Number 8