{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;} {\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f169\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f170\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;} {\f172\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f173\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f174\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f175\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);} {\f176\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f177\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255; \red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192; \red255\green255\blue255;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\* \ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{ \s16\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid12665544 header;}{\s17\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 \styrsid12665544 footer;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid1388411\rsid2321953\rsid9508377\rsid12416472\rsid12665544}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author lroberto} {\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min3}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy14\hr8\min10}{\version4}{\edmins4}{\nofpages14}{\nofwords6146}{\nofchars35038}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws41102}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot12416472 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12416472 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12416472 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12416472 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid12416472 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid12416472\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid12416472 People v. Sangalang, }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 Opinion \tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid12416472 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid1388411 14}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 of 23 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-19\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid1388411 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom19\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}} {\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}} {\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize19\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}} {\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 PEOPLE OF GUAM}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par Plaintiff-Appellee \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 vs.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 OSMUNDO V. SANGALANG, JR.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par Defendant-Appellant}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Supreme Court Case No. CRA00-003 \par Superior Court Case No.CF0450-99}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 OPINION}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Filed:}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 August 9, 2001}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Cite as: 2001 Guam 18}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam \par Argued and submitted on February 5, 2001 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4320\clshdrawnil \cellx4200\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4705\clshdrawnil \cellx8905\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\ul\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Appearing for the Defendant-Appellant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 : \par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin2880\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 J. Basil O}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid1388411 Mallan III, Esq.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 O}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid1388411 MALLAN LEON GUERRERO}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par & CALVO \par T.S. Tanaka Bldg. \par Ste. 201, Rte 4 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell \par }{\ul\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Appearing for the Plaintiff-Appellee:}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par Leonardo M. Rapadas, Esq. \par Assistant Attorney General \par Office of the Attorney General Prosecution Div. \par Ste. 2-200E, Judicial Ctr. Bldg. \par 120 W. O}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Brien Dr. \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4320\clshdrawnil \cellx4200 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4705\clshdrawnil \cellx8905\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 BEFORE: BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ, Chief Justice, PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., and F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justices. \par \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 CARBULLIDO, J.:}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [1]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab This is an appeal from a jury verdict convicting the Appellant, Osmundo V. Sangalang, Jr., of the offenses of Aggravated Murder and Murder and the concomitant Special Allegations of the Possession and Use of Deadly Weapon in the Commission of the respective felonies. Appellant advances four arguments on appeal, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 to}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 wit}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 : (1) that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of Appellant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s statements to the police; (2) that there was insufficient evidence of culpable mental state to sustain the convictions; (3)}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 that there was sufficient evidence of Appellant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s mental defect to support the defense of insanity; and (4) that the trial court failed to charge the jury, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sua sponte}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , with an instruction for the defense of diminished capacity.}{ \insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 We find that these arguments lack merit and affirm the convictions. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 I.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [2]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab On September 2, 1999, the Superior Court Territorial Grand Jury returned an indictment charging the Appellant (hereinafter }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ) with two counts of Aggravated Murder, as a first degree felony and pursuant to Title 9 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 16.30(a)(1) and (b).}{\cs15\super\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 { \cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12416472 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 The statute provides: }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 (a) Criminal homicide constitutes aggravated murder when: (1) it is committed intentionally with premeditation; . . . .(b) Aggravated murder is a felony of the first degree, . . .}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 Title 9 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 16.30(a)(1) and (b) (1993).}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Included in the indictment were Special Allegations of the Possession and Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission of a Felony, pursuant to 9 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 80.37.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The victims of the homicide were Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s wife Elaine M. Sangalang (hereinafter }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Elaine}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ) and Jun Velasco (hereinafter }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Velasco}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ).}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [3]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang and Elaine were married in 1977 and remained so until her death on July 14, 1999. Sometime during 1996, Elaine and Velasco became involved in an affair, and, despite their attempts to conceal the fact, Sangalang became aware of the affair. As the affair continued, Sangalang became increasingly withdrawn and depressed.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sangalang lost weight and had trouble at work due to excessive absences and poor performance. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [4]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab On July 14, 1999, Sangalang and Elaine had plans to meet; however, he discovered that she was at Velasco}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s residence where he observed Elaine, Velasco, and another individual dri nking. Sangalang confronted his wife and asked her to return with him; however, she refused and stated that she would meet him at about 7:00 p.m. that evening. Later in the evening, Sangalang picked up his step-grandson, and drove by the Velasco residence . Sangalang saw that his wife was still at the residence. At 8:00 p.m., Sangalang again drove by the residence and saw that his wife was still there. Sangalang became very angry, drove to his residence and retrieved his firearm. Sangalang testified that he test-fired the gun and then, with his grandson, drove back to the Velasco residence. Sangalang instructed his grandson to call Elaine outside and instruct her to return home.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Despite this request, she refused to leave. Upon hearing this, Sangalang confronted his wife, retrieved his firearm and shot at Velasco. Elaine was shot while attempting}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 to prevent her husband from shooting Velasco again. Sangalang then continued to shoot both his wife and Velasco. The children in the house attempted to call the police and Sangalang instructed them to put the phone down. He subsequently left the scene.}{ \insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [5]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang was pulled over by the Guam Police Department (hereinafter }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 GPD}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ) several hours later.}{ \insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He was}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 placed into custody and transported to their offices at Tiyan. While there, Sangalang was advised of his }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights which he waived.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He then made written and oral statements about the incident.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He further provided a re-enactment of the incident which the police video-taped. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [6]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab At the arraignment, Sangalang pleaded not guilty to the charges by reason of mental defect or illness. Sangalang was examined by Dr. James Kiffer, a clinical psychologist of the Sup erior Court, and by Dr. William Hoctor, a psychiatrist employed by the U.S. Navy and the Pacific Area Counse}{\insrsid1388411 l}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ling Network. Although both professionals diagnosed Sangalang as suffering from severe mental depression, they concluded that Sangalang was competent to stand trial. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [7]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Prior to trial, on December 20, 1999, Sangalang filed a motion to suppress the statements he made to the police when taken into custody. After a hearing on the matter, the trial court denied Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s motion on the basis that, viewing the totality of the circumstances, Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s waiver of his }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights was}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 knowing and voluntary. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Plaintiff-Appellee}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s Excerpts of Record, Tab 2 (Decision and Order, Jan. 3, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The court discounted Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s claim that his waiver was not made knowingly and observed that the voluntariness of his waiver did not become an issue until after Dr. Hoctor}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s statement to that effect. The court determined that Dr. Hoctor}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s assessment was derived from Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s statements given months after the events at issue. Further, the trial court found that there was no coercive police activity, that Sangalang executed written waivers and provided a detailed confession, that his rights were individually ex plained and that he acknowledged that he understood them, and that there was no evidence that Sangalang did not understand English. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Plaintiff-Appellee}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s Excerpts of Record, Tab 2 (Decision and Order, Jan. 3, 2000). \par \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [8]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab A jury trial was com menced on January 4, 2000. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury found Sangalang guilty of Murder as a lesser offense of Aggravated Murder and the Special Allegation (as to victim Elaine), and Aggravated Murder and the Special Allegation (as to victim Velasco).}{\cs15\super\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12416472 \chftn }{ \fs20\insrsid12416472 The lesser included offense of murder is found in 9 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 16.40(a)(1). }{\i\fs20\insrsid12416472 See }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 Transcript, Vol. VII of VII, at p. 21 (Sentencing, February 18, 2000). The statute provides: }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 Criminal homicide constitutes murder when: (1) it is committed intentionally or knowingly; . . . (b) Murder is a felony of the first degree}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{ \fs20\insrsid12416472 Title 9 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 16.40(a)(1)(b) (1993).}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 On February 18, 2000, Sangalang was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the aggravated murder of Velasco and twenty five years for the special allegation. He was further sentenced to life imprisonm ent with the possibility of parole for the murder of Elaine and twenty five years for the special allegation. The sentences were to run consecutively. Sangalang filed a timely Notice of Appeal. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 II.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [9]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab This court has jurisdiction pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}} {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 3107 and 3108 (1994). \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 III.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 A. Denial of Sangalang}{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s Motion to Suppress}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [10]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab We review a motion to suppress }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 de novo}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .}{\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Peop le v. Hualde}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1999 Guam 3, }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 19. The voluntariness of a waiver of } {\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights is reviewed }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 de novo}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 A determination that a waiver was knowing and intelligent is reviewed for clear error. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [11]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The privilege against self incrimination is derived from the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Hualde}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 20 (citing}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda v. Arizona}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 384 U.S. 436, 460-461, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 1 620-1621 (1966)). Under the Fifth Amendment, the government is prohibited from compelling an individual to incriminate himself. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ;}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see Murphy v. Waterfront Commissioner}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 378 U.S. 52, 57, 84 S.Ct. 1594, 1598, n. 6 (1964);}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 SEC v. Jerry T. O}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Brien, Inc., }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 467 U.S. 735, 742, 104 S.Ct. 2720, 2725 (1984) (recognizing that }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 the Constitution only proscribes compelled self-incrimination}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The privilege against self-incrimination attaches when the government subjects a defendant to custodial interrogation. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See Hualde,}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 20; }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see also}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Grand Jury Subpoena Dated April 9, 1996 v. Smith}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 87 F.3d 1198, 1201 (11th Cir. 1996);}{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Veloria}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , Crim. No. CR96-00055A, 1997 WL 209052, *2 (D. Guam App. Div. 1997).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Because the process of custodial interrogation contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would not otherwise do so freely, the government is required to use prophylactic procedural safeguards designed to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Hualde}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 20. In accordance with }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , an individual must be informed of the right to remain silent prior to custodial interrogation. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Veloria}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1997 WL 209052, at *2; }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Quidachay}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , Crim. No. 99997A, 1983 WL 299952, * 3 (D}{\insrsid1388411 . Guam App. Div. Nov. 8, 1983).}{ \insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [12]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Testimonial evidence that is a product of custodial interrogation is inadmissible unless a defendant waived the privilege against self-incrimination. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Murphy}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 378 U.S. at 57, 84 S.Ct. at 1598, n. 6; }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Quidachay}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1983 WL 299952 at * 3.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 To be valid, the waiver must be voluntary, knowing and intelligent. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Hualde}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 20. Statements made by a defendant who was not advised of his }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights are per se involuntary and therefore inadmissible. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Allen v. State}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 686 N.E.2d 760, 770 (Ind. 1997). If properly administered warnings were given, the court must determine whether the defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s waiver was voluntary before allowing the statements to be admitted into evidence. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . This court has stated that the inquiry of whether a waiver is coerced has two distinct dimensions:}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 First, the relin quishment of the right must have been voluntary in the sense that it was the product of a free and deliberate choice rather than intimidation, coercion, or deception.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Second, the waiver must have been made with a full awareness both of the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Only if the }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 totality of the circumstances surrounding the interrogation}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 reveal both an uncoe rced choice and the requisite level of comprehension may a court properly conclude that the Miranda rights have been waived. \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Hualde,}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 30 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [13]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 A valid waiver of [a defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s] }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights depends upon the totality of the circumstances, including the background, experience, and conduct of the defendant.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 United States v. Garibay}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 143 F.3d 534, 536 (9th Cir. 1998). There is a presumption against a finding of a waiver, and the prosecution bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [14]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab However, if police conduct is not }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 causally related to the confession, there is simply no basis for concluding that any state actor has deprived a criminal defendant of due process of law.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Colorado v. Connelly}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 479 U.S. 157, 164, 107 S.Ct. 515, 520 (1986). Because interrogators often employ forms of psychological coercion, courts may take the defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s mental condition into account as a factor in determining }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 voluntariness.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . However, the police practice of using subtle psychological techniques }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 does}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 not justify a conclusion that a defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s mental condition, by itself and apart from its relation to official coercion, should ever dispose of the inquiry into constitutional }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 voluntariness}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [15]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab In }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Colorado v. Connelly}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , the defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s statements to the police, after a waiver of }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights, were deemed admissible notwithstanding the defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s contention that it was the voice of God that told him to confess to the murder he had committed. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at 161, 107 S.Ct. at 518-519. A psychiatrist gave expert opinion that the defendant was experiencing command hallucinations which interfered with his ability to make free and rational choices. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Despite this, the Court rejected an approach that would require a court to make }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sweeping inquiries into the state of mind of a criminal defendant who has confessed, inquiries [that are] divorced from any coercion brought to bear on the defendant by the State.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid1388411 at 166-167, 107 S.Ct. at 521.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [16]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Similarly, in the instant case, although there was an allegation that Sangalang suffered from a mental illness, in the totalit y of the circumstances, and in the absence of some police coercion, it cannot be said that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress. The only witness at the suppression hearing was Special Agent Joseph S. Carbullido (hereinafter }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Carbullido}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ) of the Guam Police Department. Officer Carbullido had transported Sangalang to the GPD offices in Tiyan after he had been arrested. Carbullido testified that Sangalang appeared }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 hyper}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 and nervous but that he surmised that Sangalang was hyper and nervous about the pullover and arrest. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 15 (Suppression He aring, Dec. 30, 1999). Handcuffs were removed upon his arrival at the police station. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 18 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). Carbullido advised Sangalang of his Constitutional rights at approximately 6:20 a.m.. Carbullido t estified to the procedure that had been used to obtain the waiver of the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights, including the reading of each of the rights and an acknowledgment that Sangalang understood each of those rights. Transcript, vol. I of VII,}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 pp. 20-21 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999); }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see also}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Appellee}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s Excerpts of Record, Excerpts 1, p. 4 (Custodial Interrogation form). It did not appear that Sangalang had difficulty understanding what was being explained to him nor wer e definition of terms ever needed. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 22-23 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). In fact, Carbullido testified that Sangalang appeared coherent and responded appropriately to the questions asked. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 2 5 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sangalang gave detailed responses to the questions asked. Transcript, vol. I of VII,}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 p. 28 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). Carbullido testified that he had not raised his voice nor banged a table at any point in the interview process. Transcript, vol. I of VII,}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 p. 29 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). Officer Carbullido then described the circumstances surrounding the preparation of Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}} }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s written statement. Transcript, vol. I of VII, pp. 30-37 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). Carbullido testified that no promises were made to Sangalang nor was Sangalang subjected to physical mistreatment. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 74 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1 9 99). On cross-examination, Carbullido denied that Sangalang seemed to act like someone on drugs. Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 82 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). But he admitted that Sangalang had indicated several times during his video re-enactmen t that he was }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 going to explode.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Transcript, vol. I of VII, p. 89 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [17]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Conspicuously absent from the above outline of the testimony is any fact that would support a finding of police misconduct.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 In fact, counsel for Sangalang pointed out that the police had done a good job. Transcript, vol. I of VII, pp. 102-103 (Suppression Hearing, Dec. 30, 1999). Sangalang argues that it was not that external forces were applied but rather, as pointed out by Dr. Hoctor}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s report,}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 that internal pressures compelled him to give an involuntary waiver of his rights. However, for this court to find a violation of }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 on this basis alone would require us to conduct a sweeping inquiry into the state of mind of Sangalang separate from any coercion brought to bear on him by the government. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Connelly}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 479 U.S. at 166-167, 107 S.Ct. at 521.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Due process requires the exclusion of evidence obtained by the government in disregard of an individual}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s constitutional rights. Absent coercive police activity, there is no basis for finding that a confession was not voluntary within the meaning of the Due Process Clause. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at 167, 107 S.Ct. at 522. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [18]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Therefore, we hold that notwithstanding Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s alleged mental condition, in the totality of the circumstances, his waiver of the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 rights was valid and that the lower court did not commit}{ \insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 error in denying Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s motion to suppress.}{ \insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 B.}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sufficiency of Evidence to Support the Conviction}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [19]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang launches a two-pronged attack against his convictions: (1)}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 that he has demonstrated that there was more than sufficient evidence of his mental illness that the jury could not have rationally concluded that Sa ngalang had the requisite mental states for Aggravated Murder and Murder; and (2) that there was overwhelming evidence that Sangalang was acting under an extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there had been a reasonable explanation or excuse a nd therefore that, pursuant to 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 130.60, this court should reduce the degree of the offenses or punishment imposed. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1. Standard of Review}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [20]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a crimin al conviction, the critical inquiry is whether the evidence in the record could reasonably support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Reyes}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1998 Guam 32, }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 7 (citing }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson v. Virginia}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 443 U.S. 303, 318, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788-89 (1979)). }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 When a criminal defendant asserts that there is insufficient evidence to sustain the conviction, this court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution to ascertain whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . This is a highly deferential standard of review. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 (citing }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 United States v. Rubio-Villareal}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 967 F.2d 294 (9th Cir. 1992) (}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 en banc}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 )). \par \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 2. Analysis}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 a.}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Evidence Supporting the Convictions}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [21]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab After reviewing the entire record in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 that a rational j ury could have found that the essential elements of the offenses charged were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See Reyes}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1998 Guam 32 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 7. Most especially, at issue here was whether Sangalang acted intentionally and with premeditation.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 In this regard, the jury was presented with testimony from eyewitnesses to the incident. Velasco}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s son testified that he saw Sangalang shoot his father.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Transcript, vol. III of VII, p. 8 (Trial, Jan.6, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He further testified that Elaine tried to stop Sangalang from shooting again but that Sangalang pushed Elaine down, shot her and continued to shoot the two victims until Sangalang was out of bullets. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Other witnesses to the incident attempted to contact the police but were told by Sangalang to put the phone down. Transcript, vol. III of VII, p. 11 (Trial, Jan.6, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The jury heard evidence that it appeared that Sangalang stealthily departed the victims}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 location. Transcript, vol. III of VII, p. 24 (Trial, Jan. 6, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Finally, the jury also considered Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s confession and video-tape}{\insrsid1388411 d re-enactment of the incident.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [22]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The evidence more than adequately demonstrated Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s responsibility for the crimes that he was convicted and we therefore find that his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence lacks merit.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 There was m ore than sufficient evidence to support the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s conclusion that Sangalang acted intentionally and with premeditation in causing the deaths of Elaine and Velasco. \par \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 b.}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Reduction of Degree of Offense}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [23]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang further argues that under the facts and circumstances of this case, there was no evidence of a culpable mental state to support the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding and that this court should exercise it s discretion and reduce the murder convictions to manslaughter as defined in 9 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 16.50.}{ \cs15\super\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12416472 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 Manslaughter is defined in 9 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 16.50(a)(2). That section provides: \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 (a) Criminal homicide constitutes manslaughter when: . . . (2) a homicide which would otherwise be murder is committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. The reasonable ness of such explanation or excuse shall be determined from the viewpoint of a reasonable person in the defendant}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 s situation under the circumstances as he believes them to be. The defendant must prove the reasonableness of such explanation or excuse by a preponderance of the evidence. \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid12416472 Title 9 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 16.50(a)(2) (1993).}}} {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }{\insrsid1388411 \par }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sangalang relies upon the following statute: \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The appellate court may reverse, affirm or modify a judg ment or order appealed from, or reduce the degree of the offense or the punishment imposed, and may set aside, affirm or modify any or all of the proceedings subsequent to, or dependent upon, such judgment or order, and may, if proper, order a new trial a nd may, if proper, remand the cause to the trial court for such further proceedings as may be just under the circumstances. \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 130.60 (1993). \par \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [24]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab In }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Reyes}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , the defendant asked this court to exercise its discretion and find that there was insufficient evidence of a culpable mental state to support his conviction of murder and reduce that charge to manslaughter, either reckless or under the influence of an extreme mental or emotional disturba nce for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Reyes}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1998 Guam 32 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 6. The court found that there was sufficient evidence for which the jury could reasonably conclude that the appellant had acted k nowingly and recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 8. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [25]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Similarly, there is sufficient evidence in this case to support the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s conclusion that Sangalang had acted intentionally and with premeditation in causing the deaths of Elaine and Velasco. Nothing in the record compels us to exercise our discretion and reduce the degree of the offenses of which Sangalang was convicted. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 C.}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sufficiency of Evidence for Defense of Insanity}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [26]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang claims that there was sufficient evidence of insanity to support the complete defense offered by statute against the two offenses of which he was co nvicted. Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s basic argument is that the evidence more than adequately showed that he was legally insane at the time of the offenses. We reject this argument and find that Sangalang has failed to meet his burden of proof on the affirmative defense of insanity. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1.}{\b\insrsid1388411 }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Standard of Review}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [27]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Preliminarily, an issue arises with respect to the proper standard of review in determining whether Sangalang proved his affirmative defense of insanity.}{ \cs15\super\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12416472 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 The People regard the same standard as that used for a judgment of acquittal, i.e., that this court must review the evidence against the defendant for sufficiency in the light most favorable to the government to determine whether any rational trier of fact c ould have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Appellee}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 s Opening Brief at 6 (citing }{ \i\fs20\insrsid12416472 People v. Quinata}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 , 1999 Guam 6). Sangalang, on the other hand , argues that this court}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{ \fs20\insrsid12416472 s inquiry is limited to whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the jury}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 s finding of sanity. Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 s Opening Brief at 15 (citing }{\i\fs20\insrsid12416472 People v. Wolff}{ \fs20\insrsid12416472 , 61 Cal.2d 795, 40 Cal. Rptr. 271 (1964)).}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 A more common}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 issue defendants raise is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding that the prosecution met all the elements required for a conviction.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 As stated in the discussion of the preceding issue, the Supreme Court of the Untied States has determined that, when there is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, an appellate court views the evidence against an appellant in the light most favorable to the government to determine whether }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson v. Virginia}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2788 (1979) (citation omitted). \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [28]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 standard is framed in light of the fact that the governm ent has the burden to prove all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt before a conviction may be obtained. The argument presently before the court differs from a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction in that, with regard to the insanity defense, it is the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , and not the government, who has the burden of showing that he was legally insane by a preponderance of the evidence. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Title 9 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 7.22 (a) (1994). Thus, the issue is whether and how this distinction affects the standard by which we review the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding on the insanity defense. This is an issue of first impression in this jurisdiction. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [29]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab A brief review of th e standards articulated by jurisdictions that, like Guam, require a defendant to prove the defense of insanity by a preponderance of the evidence is warranted. Some courts review a jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding regarding an aff irmative defense under the same type of standard used for a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, that is, the standard enunciated in }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson v. Virginia}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See, e.g.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 State v. Prince}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 688 So.2d 643, 649 (La. 1997);}{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 State v. Lively}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 921 P.2d 1035, 1043 (Wash. 1996) (}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 en banc}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ); }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Brown v. State }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 295 S.E.2d 727, 732-33 (Ga. 1982). In Louisiana, for example, the court explicitly adopted the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 standard, even despite the fact that the defendant has the burden to prove the insanity defense.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 That court stated: \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 In reviewing a claim of insufficiency of evidence in regard to a defense of insanity, a reviewing court applies the test set forth in }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson v. Virginia}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 supra}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , to determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most fa vorable to the state, any rational juror could have found that the defendant had not proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he was insane at the time of the offense.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Prince}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 688 So.2d at 649; }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 cf. State v. Mishne}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 427 A.2d 450, 458 (Me. 1981) (employing a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type standard); }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 State v. Anderson}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 723 P.2d 464, 468 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [30]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab By contrast, the Texas courts have rejected a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type standard of review in the context of the insanity defense.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See Meraz v. State}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 785 S.W.2d 146, 154-55 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990).}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Instead, the intermediate criminal appeals court reviews a jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s findings on the insanity defense using the standard employed by civil courts to determine whether a new trial is warranted, the test being }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt \f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 whether after considering }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 all the evidence relevant to the issue at hand}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , the judgment is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence so as to be manifestly unjust.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at 155 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The court}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s reasoning for its rejection of }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 is two-fold. First, a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type review is not mandated because }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 de als with a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, whereas in the case of an affirmative defense, the defendant admits that the elements of the crime are met, but that he also met his burden of proving the affirmative defense of insanity. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at 152-53. Second, the Texas Constitution gave the intermediary courts of criminal appeals the authority to conduct a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 weight }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 of the evidence review. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at 153-54.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Based on these two reasons, the Texas court rejected the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type review and adopted the weight of the evidence review in all cases where the defendant challenges the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s findings on the a}{\insrsid1388411 ffirmative defense of insanity.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [31]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The most important distinction between a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type review and a weight of the evidence review lies in the result. The Texas court explained that if a conviction is challenged because of insufficient evidence, and a court reverses using a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type review, the defendant cannot be retried under the double jeopardy principles.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at 156.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 By contrast, the }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 weight of the evidence}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 refers to a jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s determination that more evidence supports one side of the issue than the other, and a court}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding that the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s determination was against the weight of the evidence does not preclude a retrial.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .; }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see also Bethay v. State}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 219 S.E.2d 743, 747, n. 1 (Ga. 1975) (holding that a reversal based on insufficient evidence would bar retrial whereas }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [ w]here the trial court grants a new trial on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, a subsequent prosecution would not be barred by the [double jeopardy statute].}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ), }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 disagreed with on other grounds by Humphrey v. State}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 314 S.E.2d 436 (Ga. 1984). \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [32]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab In formulating the proper standard of review under these circumstances, we note that although the government bears the burden of proving each and every element of an offense beyond a reaso nable doubt, its burden does not extend to negating a defense explicitly designated as an affirmative defense such as the one at issue here. Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 90.21 (a),(c) (1993). In Guam, the defense of mental illn ess, disease or defect excusing criminal conduct is specifically designated an affirmative defense which the defendant bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence. 9 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 7.22(a). Successful invocation of the defense of insanity excuses criminal responsibility for an offense. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Jung}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 2001 Guam 15, }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 22. The defendant necessarily admits that he committed the act as charged but that because of his mental illness, disease or defect, he is excused. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.; see also Bethea v. United States,}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 365 A.2d 64, 83 n.38 (D.C. 1976) (observing that the issue of the accused}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s possible exculpation on the grounds of insanity does not arise unless and until the government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt all of the elements of the charged offense).}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Moreover, so that there is no misunderstanding with the approach we take here, neither side provided this court with the jury instructions that the court ostensibly charged.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Thus, there is no issue as to error in the law as instructed, nor that the instructions were misleading or incomprehensible.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 All that is at issue in this case is whether the jury should have found that Sangalang was insane. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [33]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab With the above considerations in mind, we must now determine which test to employ in our jurisdiction when the defendant challenges the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding on the insanity def ense. Under the criminal procedure statutes, a motion for acquittal may be granted only if the court finds that there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction. Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 100.10 (1993). There is nothing to preclude the defendant from challenging both the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, as well as the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s findings on his affirmative defense of insanity. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See Meraz}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 785 S.W.2d at 153.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 However, a challenge to the insanity finding does not implicate the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s findings on the elements of the crime.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Because insanity is an affirmative defense in this jurisdiction, a defendant who raises an insanity defense essentially concedes that he committed the offense, but that he should be absolved of responsibility because the evidence shows that he was legally insane. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See id.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 If a defendant admits or concedes that he committed the offense, he is essentially admitting that the evidence was sufficient to convict. Thus, a }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jackson}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 -type review of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction is not warranted. Rather, because the defendant concedes that the government met its burden, the challenge to the jury}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s findings on the insanity defense necessitates a factual review, as opposed to a legal review. In such cases, the court weighs the evidence, and if the case is exceptional in that the evidence is so }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence so as to be manifestly unjust,}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 a new trial would be warranted. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Meraz}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 785 S.W.2d at 154-55; }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 110.30 (1993) (providing that a new trial is warranted if }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 justice}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 so requires).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 We are persuaded that this test provides the appropriate means of reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence relating to an insani}{\insrsid1388411 ty defense.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 2. Analysis}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [34]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Turning to the issue at hand, under the standard of review announced above, we find that Sangalang has failed to meet his burden of proof.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Two mental health professionals testified before the jury below. The Appellee called Dr. James Kiffer (hereinafter }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Dr. Kiffer}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 ), a clinical psychologist employed by the Superior Court of Guam, to testify.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Dr. Kiffer was qualified a s an expert in forensic psychology. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.7 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000). Dr. Kiffer testified to interviewing Sangalang at least twice.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.8 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000). He met with the government and reviewed some of the police reports and the video re-enactment in the preparation of his opinion. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.8 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Dr. Kiffer diagnosed Sangalang as suffering from a major depression of fairly long standing duration, possibly most of 1999. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.9 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He further testified that the depression did not result in a lack of substantial capacity to know or understand what he was doing. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.10 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000). Dr. Kiffer testified that after his conversation with Sangalang he concluded that Sangalang could control his actions. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.15 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000).}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [35]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s expert, Dr. William Hoctor, a psychiatrist, was qualified as an expert in the field of forensic psychiatry. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p. 125 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000). Dr. Hoctor testified that his diagnosis, as well as Dr. Kiffer}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s , concluded that Sangalang was suffering from severe major depression. Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.130 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000).}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Dr. Hoctor testified that it was his opinion that at the time of the crime Sangalang was mentally ill, but that his mental illness }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 did not render him substantially incapable of understanding the nature and quality of his act, or that it was wrong. In other words, he knew what he was doing, despite the fact that he was mentally ill.}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Transcript, vol. V of VII, pp.136-37 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000). Dr. Hoctor further testified that to }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 a degree of reasonable medical certainty that as a result of his mental il lness, that he lacked substantial capacity to control his actions at the time of the crime.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Transcript, vol. V of VII, p.137 (Trial, Jan.10, 2000).}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [36]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Additionally, other evidence was before the jury from which it could have made its determination to reject Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s insanity defense.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sangalang cited to the California Supreme Court}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s case of }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Wolff}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 61 Cal. 2d 79 5, 40 Cal. Rptr. 271 (1964). Although the case has been subsequently overruled by statute, it did make some salient observations that this court may utilize. There, the defendant, a fifteen year old boy at the time of the crime, was charged with the murde r of his mother.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. The jury found that he was legally sane at the time of the commission of the offense, and the trial court determined that it was first degree murder. Despite the unanimity of expert opinions to the effect that in each of their respective medical opinions defendant suffered from a permanent form of one of the group of mental disorders generically known as schizophrenia and that the defendant was legally insane at the time he murdered his mother, the California Supreme Court held that that fact did not preclude the }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 jury from weighing, as they were required to do, these witnesses}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 further opinions that the defend ant was legally insane at the time of the murder.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Wolff}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 61 Cal. 2d 795, 812, 40 Cal. Rptr. 271, 281 (1964). Moreover, it observed that an examination of the conduct and declarations of the defendant a re relevant considerations and admissible proof of his state of mind for the respective offenses with which he was charged. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at 805, 40 Cal. Rptr. at 277.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [37]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Wolff}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 court looked at certain types of conduct as evidence of legal sa nity. These included an ability to devise and execute a deliberate plan; the manner in which the crime was conceived, planned and executed; the fact that witnesses observed no change in the defendant}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s manner and that he appeared to be normal; the fact that the defendant walked steadily and calmly, spoke clearly and coherently and appeared to be fully conscious of what he was doing; and the fact that shortly after committing the crime the defendant was cooperativ e and not abusive or combative, that questions were answered by him quickly and promptly; and that he appeared rational, spoke coherently, was oriented as to time, place and those persons who were present. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at 805-806, 40 Cal. Rptr. at 277. The court further held that the oral declarations of a defendant made during the period of time material to his offense may be used as evidence of legal sanity. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at 808, 40 Cal. Rptr. at 279. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [38]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab In this case, the facts before the jury included evi dence that Sangalang discovered that his wife was still in the company of the man with whom she had been having an affair for a significant period of time. Sangalang returned to his residence and retrieved his firearm.}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Prior to confronting his wife, Sanga lang test-fired the weapon. Sangalang took his step-grandson with him and had the latter go into the house to speak with the victim. All the while, he had remained hidden behind a tree. Sangalang confronted the victims and proceeded to shoot them.}{ \insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 He inst ructed children at the residence not to call the police and then left. Additionally, Sangalang had been cooperative with the police, was not combative or abusive and rendered a lengthy and detailed description of the events orally, in writing, and in a vi deo re-enactment. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [39]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 The members of the jury are the exclusive judges of the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Mesa}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1980 WL 18234 at *2 (D. Guam App. Div. Sept. 9, 1980). Thus, deference must be paid to the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s role as the body charged with the resolution of facts in dispute. In the instant case, the jury}{\insrsid1388411 }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 was presented not only with Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s psychiatric expert but also had before it the facts and circumstances of his mental condition prior and subsequent to the homicides.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 We hold that the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding that Sangalang was sane at the time of the act was not against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence and consequently decline to reverse the convictions on this ground.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 D. Failure to Instruct, }{\b\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Sua Sponte}{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , on the Defense of Diminished Capacity}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [40]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Finally, Sangalang argues that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sua sponte}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , on the defense of diminished capacity. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 1. Standard of Review}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [41]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab When the defendant does not object to the jury instructions at the time of trial, an appellate court will review only for plain error. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Perez}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1999 Guam 2, }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 21; }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 see also}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 130.50(b) (1993).}{\cs15\super\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid12416472 \chftn }{ \fs20\insrsid12416472 Plain errors or defects affecting substantial rights may be noticed although they were not brought to the attention of the court. Title 8 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid12416472 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid12416472 130.50(b) (1993).}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Plain error is highly prejudicial error affecting substantial rights. Such error will be found only where necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice or to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Perez}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 1999 Guam 2 at }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 21.}{\insrsid12416472 \par }{\insrsid1388411\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 2. Analysis}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [42]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The concept of diminished capacity as provided in Guam}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}} {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s criminal code was recently discussed in}{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Jung}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 2001 Guam 15. In }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jung}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , we adopted the view that any evidence of mental illness, disease or defect is admissible if it is relevant to the issue of whether a defendant possessed the requisite mental state required for the offense charged. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 People v. Jung}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , 2001 Guam 15 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 39. We expressly rejected any limitation which would render such evidence relevant only to the issue of insanity. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at }{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 38.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 We als o rejected the idea that the use of such evidence was limited in applicability to specific intent crimes or homicide crimes. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id. }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 42- 43. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [43]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab Although this court concluded that an instruction to the jury on the relevance and applicability of evidence of mental abnormality was the better practice,}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 whether or not the failure to instruct the jury on diminished capacity is reversible error is dependent upon a plain error analysis where, as is the case here, no instructions were requested by either party. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 48-49.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 In }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jung}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , we held that under the circumstances of the case, the failure to instruct the jury, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sua sponte}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , on the diminished capacity defense constituted plain error. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 58. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [44]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The instant case is distinguishable from }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jung }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 in that neither party in the instant case thought it appropriate to include the jury instructions as part of the record on appeal. Much of the analysis in }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jung}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 was predicated on an examination of whether the instructions as a whole had the effect of precluding the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s consideration of the evidence of mental disease or defect in determining whether the government had proved the elements, most specifically the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 mens rea}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , of the offenses charged.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 See id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 54-55.}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 In }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Jung}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , we found that the instructions may have misled the jury into thinking that the evidence was relevant only to the issue of insanity. }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 We further found that in a case where the existence of the requisite }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 mens rea}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 was the determinative issue, preclusion of the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s consideration of evidence of mental abnormality on the issue of the government}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s burden to prove the }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 mens rea}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 element was not harmless. }{ \i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Id}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 . at }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 56. Here, the record before us is inadequate to perform such an analysis and therefore precludes a finding of harmless error and consequently plain error in the trial court}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s failure to instruct, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sua sponte}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , on diminished capacity. \par }{\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [45]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab The facts in the instant case leads us to believe that even if it were error for the trial court to instruct the jury that evidence of Sangalang}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s mental abnormality could be considered in determining whether the government has proven the required mental state, such error was harmless. In light of the inadequate record presented for our review, we are not persuaded that the lower court}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s failure to instruct affected the outcome of the proceedings nor can we conclude that a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result in affirming Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s conviction. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4680\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 IV.}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\b\insrsid1388411 \par }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 [46]}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 \tab We find that although Sangalang}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s mental condition is a relevant consideration in determining the admissibility of his statements to the police, in this case Sangalang voluntarily waived his rights under }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Miranda}{ \insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .}{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Further, there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, and the jury}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 s finding on the in sanity defense was not against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. Finally, although it was error for the trial court not to instruct the jury, }{\i\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 sua sponte}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 , on the defense of diminished capacity, such error was harmless. For these reasons, the judgment is }{\b\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 AFFIRMED}{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 .}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR. \par Associate Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid1388411 }{\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 Associate Justice}{\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid1388411 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid1388411 {\insrsid12416472\charrsid1388411 BENJAMIN J.F. CRUZ \par Chief Justice \par }}