People of Guam v Guerrero [2003] GUSC 17; 2003 Guam 18 (27 August 2003)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

PEOPLE OF GUAM
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

DANNY F. GUERRERO
Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court Case No. CRA01-004
Superior Court Case No. CM1059-98

OPINION

Filed: August 27, 2003

Cite as: 2003 Guam 18

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted on April 7, 2003
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee: James Casey Rosetta L San Nicolas Assistant Attorneys General Office of the Attorney General General Crimes Division Suite 2-200E, Judicial Ctr. Bldg. 120 W O=Brien Dr. Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Defendant-Appellant: Curtis C. Van de Veld, Esq. The Van de Veld Law Offices, P.C. Suite 215, 194 Hernan Cortes Ave. Hagåtña, Guam

BEFORE: F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice; FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, Associate Justice; RICHARD H. BENSON, Justice Pro Tempore.

TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, J.:

[1] Defendant-Appellant Danny Flores Guerrero (hereinafter AGuerrero@) was convicted of the misdemeanor crime of Driving While Under the Influence of Alcohol. On appeal, Guerrero challenges his conviction on the following three grounds: (1) improper curtailment during his defense counsel=s cross-examination of Guam Police Department Officer Manuel Chong (hereinafter AOfficer Chong@); (2) insufficiency of the evidence; and (3) inconsistent verdicts. We find that none of the grounds advanced by Guerrero warrants a reversal of his conviction and affirm the judgment.

I.

[2] At approximately 2:30 in the morning of April 14, 1998, while inside a marked police vehicle, Officer Chong observed a gray Toyota Forerunner veering off the roadway by the Tamuning Route 14 Shell Gas Station, between two power poles, and almost colliding into one of the poles. The Forerunner reversed back onto Route 14 and accelerated towards the Tumon area, while executing two 360 degree turns. Although the driver eventually regained control of the vehicle while proceeding towards the Tumon area, Officer Chong noted that the vehicle was constantly fish-tailing. Officer Chong eventually pulled the vehicle over, and the operator identified himself as Guerrero.

[3] Officer Chong perceived that Guerrero was driving while under the influence of alcohol. Not only did Officer Chong note that Guerrero emitted a very strong odor of alcoholic beverages through his mouth and nose, but also that Guerrero had glassy and bloodshot eyes and a slurred speech. Moreover, when Guerrero exited his vehicle, he had to lean onto the vehicle for support. When Officer Chong asked Guerrero if he had been drinking, Guerrero admitted that he had consumed seven beers. After Guerrero indicated that he did not have any physical ailments that would possibly impair his performance on a set of tests to determine if he was impaired, Officer Chong then performed a battery of three tests as part of the Standardized Field Sobriety Test.[1] The first test performed, namely the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus, tests the eyes of the driver for any involuntary jerkiness. Transcript, pp. 96-97 (Jury Selection & Trial, Aug. 9, 2000). The second test, the Walk-and-Turn Test, is a test where the individual is instructed to take nine steps down a line, turn a certain way, and take nine steps back. Transcript, pp. 96-97 (Jury Selection & Trial, Aug. 9, 2000). The third test, the One Leg Stand Test, is when an individual is instructed to stand and raise a foot of choice off the ground, toe pointing forward, knee straight, hands to the side, and then count from one to thirty while in this manner. Transcript, pp. 96-97 (Jury Selection & Trial, Aug. 9, 2000). Officer Chong determined that Guerrero failed all three tests, and was therefore impaired. Guerrero was taken to the police precinct and was read his Constitutional rights. Officer Chong then gave Guerrero the opportunity to take a breathalyzer test; however, because Guerrero became belligerent, no such test was ever given. Transcript, pp. 127-128 (Jury Selection & Trial, Aug. 9, 2000).

[4] On July 28, 1998, the People of Guam (hereinafter APeople@) filed a complaint and charged Guerrero with Driving While Under the Influence of Alcohol (As a Misdemeanor), in violation of Title 16 GCA '18102(a), and Imprudent Driving (As a Petty Misdemeanor), in violation of Title 16 GCA '3301(a) and '9108. A jury trial was held on August 9-10, 2000. On August 11, 2000, the jury thereafter returned a verdict of guilty to the charge of Driving While Under the Influence of Alcohol (As a Misdemeanor) and a verdict of not guilty as to the Imprudent Driving charge. Guerrero was sentenced on September 1, 2000.

On August 3, 2001, the judgment was entered on the docket and Guerrero filed a Notice of Appeal on August 13, 2001.[2]

II.

[5] This court has jurisdiction over this appeal from a final judgment. Title 8 GCA '130.15(a) (1993) and Title 7 GCA