People of Guam v Natividad [2005] GUSC 26; 2005 Guam 28 (30 December 2005)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

PEOPLE OF GUAM,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs.

EMERITO C. NATIVIDAD,
Defendant-Appellee,

Supreme Court Case No. CRA05-002
Superior Court Case No. CF0094-02

OPINION

Filed: December 30, 2005

Cite as: 2005 Guam 28

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellant: Marianne Woloschuk, Esq. Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 287 W. O’Brien Dr. Hagåtña, GU 96910	Appearing for Defendant-Appellee: Howard Trapp, Esq. Howard Trapp, Inc. 200 Saylor Building 139 Chalan Santo Papa Hagåtña, Guam 96910

BEFORE: F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice; FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, Associate Justice; ROBERT J. TORRES, JR., Associate Justice.

TORRES, J.:

[1] Plaintiff-Appellant People of Guam appeal from a Superior Court Judgment of Acquittal, issued after a jury returned a guilty verdict, in this criminal action. Defendant-Appellee Emerito C. Natividad filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that this court lacks appellate jurisdiction to hear the appeal. He challenges the People’s reliance on Title 8 GCA § 130.20(a)(3) in this case, and cites this court’s decision in People v. Lujan, 1998 Guam 28, that recognized statutory limitations to appellate jurisdiction. The People opposed the motion, arguing, inter alia, that the reinstatement of the jury’s guilty verdict does not violate Double Jeopardy concerns. We hold, in accordance with our prior decisions, that the statutes governing appellate jurisdiction are to be strictly construed, and that Guam law does not allow the People to appeal from the trial court’s grant of a Motion for Acquittal after a jury’s guilty verdict. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.^[1]

I.

[2]