People of Guam v Orallo [2006] GUSC 8; 2006 Guam 08 (8 June 2006)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

PEOPLE OF GUAM,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

JESSE PAMA ORALLO,
Defendant-Appellant.

OPINION

Supreme Court Case No. CRA05-001
Superior Court Case No. CF0239-99

Filed: June 8, 2006

Cite as: 2006 Guam 8

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted on February 27, 2006
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee: Marianne Woloschuk, Esq. Office of the Attorney General The Justice Bldg. 287 W O’Brien Dr. Hagåtña, Guam 96910

Appearing for Defendant-Appellant: Howard Trapp, Esq. Howard Trapp Inc. 200 Saylor Bldg. 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.

TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, J.:

[1] Defendant-Appellant Jesse Pama Orallo appeals from the trial court’s judgment of conviction on: (1) three counts of first degree criminal sexual conduct; (2) three counts of second degree criminal sexual conduct; (3) one count of third degree sexual criminal conduct; and (4) one count of fourth degree sexual criminal conduct. Orallo argues that this court should reconsider its holding in People v. Orallo, 2004 Guam 5 (Orallo I). We decline to do so and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

I.

[2] We incorporate by reference the facts set forth by this court in People v. Orallo, 2004 Guam 5 ¶¶ 2–6.

[3] In Orallo I, this court reversed the trial court’s decision holding that Investigator Anthony W. Blas’ Written Statement was not discoverable under 8 GCA § 70.10. The matter was remanded to the trial court for a sentencing hearing. Orallo was sentenced on January 3, 2005. This appeal followed.

II.

[4] This court has jurisdiction over the instant appeal pursuant to 48 U.S.C. § 1424-1(a)(2) (Westlaw through Pub. L. 109-76 (2005)) and 8 GCA § 130.15(a) (2005).

III.

[5] "Under the ‘law of the case’ doctrine, a court is generally precluded from reconsidering an issue that has already been decided by the same court, or a higher court in the identical case." People v. Hualde, 1999 Guam 3 ¶ 13. See also Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800