People of Guam v Ojeda [2011] GUSC 27; 2011 Guam 27 (23 December 2011)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

THE PEOPLE OF GUAM,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ARTHUR JOSEPH OJEDA,
Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court Case No. CRA10-011
Superior Court Case No. CF0208-09

OPINION

Filed: December 23, 2011

Cite as: 2011 Guam 27

Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
Argued and submitted July 11, 2011
Hagåtña, Guam

Appearing for Defendant-Appellant: Anthony R. Camacho, Esq. GCIC Bldg., Ste. 808 414 W Soledad Ave. Hagåtña, GU 96910

Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee: Jonathan R. Quan, Esq. Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General Prosecution Division 287 W O'Brien Dr. Hagåtña, GU 96910

BEFORE: F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice; ROBERT J. TORRES, Associate Justice; and KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Associate Justice.

MARAMAN, J.:

[1] Defendant-Appellant Arthur Joseph Ojeda appeals from convictions of five counts of First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct, as a First Degree Felony, and nine counts of Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct, as a First Degree Felony. Ojeda argues that the Superior Court violated his Sixth Amendment rights because the trial court, relying on Guam's rape shield statute, 6 GCA § 8207, restricted him from eliciting relevant information regarding prior sexual assault of the victim. He further submits that such violation of his constitutional rights was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore, his conviction must be reversed.

[2] We conclude that the proffered evidence was admissible under the rape shield statute. We hold that the trial court should have allowed broader cross-examination of the minor to satisfy Ojeda's Sixth Amendment rights to confrontation and to present a defense. The constitutional infringement by the restriction of cross-examination of M.A.D.C. was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court, vacate Ojeda's convictions, and remand this case.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

[3]