{\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};}{\f172\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f173\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}
{\f175\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f176\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f177\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f178\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}
{\f179\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f180\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;}}{\*\revtbl {Unknown;}}
{\*\rsidtbl \rsid3683556\rsid4934913\rsid9508377\rsid9779984}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min4}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy10\hr10\min30}
{\version3}{\edmins7}{\nofpages25}{\nofwords11644}{\nofchars66371}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws77860}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margb720 
\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\rsidroot9779984 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9779984 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9779984 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9779984 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9779984 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \linex0\headery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid9779984\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 People v. Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 , Opinion\tab \tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid9779984 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid3683556 25}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  of 34
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid9779984 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-9\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid3683556 
{\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom9\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\dpysize9\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid9779984 
\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\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 PEOPLE OF GUAM,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par Plaintiff-Appellee,
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 vs.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ANTHONY DUENAS SANTOS}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 
\par Defendant-Appellant.}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Supreme Court Case No.: CRA00-006 
\par Superior Court Case No.: CF0576-99}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 OPINION}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Filed:}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 January 3, 2003}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2003 Guam 1}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
\par Argued and submitted on March 12, 2002
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \ql \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard 
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\ul\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 :
\par Leonardo M. Rapadas\tab 
\par Assistant Attorney General
\par Office of the Attorney General
\par Prosecution Division
\par Ste. 2-200E, Guam Judicial Ctr.
\par 120 W. O}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Brien Dr.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell 
\par }{\ul\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appearing for Defendant-Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 :
\par David J. Highsmith, Esq. 
\par The Law Office of David J. Highsmith, P.C.
\par Ste. 209, Union Bank of California Bldg.
\par 194 Hernan Cortes Ave.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910
\par 
\par \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt
\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 BEFORE: PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, Associate Justice.}{
\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 CARBULLIDO, J.:}{\b\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [1]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab This appeal arises out of the disappearance of Herman August Pangelinan Santos (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In relation to Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s disappearance, a jury convicted Defendant-Appellant Anthony Duenas Santos (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
) of two charges of Aggravated Murder and three charges of Special Allegation of possession and use of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos enumerates the following arguments on appeal, 
}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to wit}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 : (1) that the trial court erred in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for the appointment of a forensic pathologist; (2) that the trial court erred in curtailing the cross-examination of a government witness and in not }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  providing the jury with an informer instruction; (3) that the trial court erred in admitting statements that Santos made to the police; and, (4) that the trial court erred in denying Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for a change of venue and in commenting to the jury about why they were being sequestered.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We find that none of the enumerated arguments warrants a reversal.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Accordingly, we affirm the convictions.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 I.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [2]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab On September 2, 1999, eleven year-old Hermie was reported missing.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
He was last seen playing around his residence located in Naki Street, Ordot around 4 P.M. that day.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 His bicycle was found near a water drainage about 20 feet from his home.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Daisy Pangelinan (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Pangelinan}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ), Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s mother, testified at trial that she had last seen her son riding besides Santos in a gold pick-up truck that belonged to her father.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Santos was Pangelinan}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s boyfriend during Hermie}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid9779984 s disappearance, but was not Hermie}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s natural father.}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 On or about September 3, 1999 through September 4, 1999, police questioned Santos about the missing person report at the Hag\'e5t\'f1a precinct for approximately nineteen hours and thirty minutes.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 During one of the three interviews that Santos had with the officers, one of the special agents transcribed a nine-page statement from Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [3]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The police and family called out to the public for information on Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s whereabouts and received tips that witnesses had seen the boy around the Dededo vicinity.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
On September 8, 1999, police found charred remains in a pit located on an abandoned ranch on remote Never Mind Road, Dededo.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The police could not readily ascertain whether the remains were human or those of an animal.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequently, Dr. Aurelio Espinola (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Dr. Espinola}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ), the Chief Medical Examiner, took possession of the remains for analysis.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [4]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 family owned a ranch within two miles from the area where the remains were found.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Neighbors in the area said that, around September 6, 1999, they had seen, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 someone . . . burning what they assumed was trash in the old ranch . . . .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab B, Exhibit 5.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Some of the witnesses were also able to positively identify Santos as the individual who they saw was burning }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 something.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos did not deny burning }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 something}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 in the pit; however, he claimed that he was burning chicken and dog bones that he found around the area.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [5]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Police questioned a Joey Arnaiz (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ), a conservation officer and a nephew of Santos.}{
\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Arnaiz}
{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s mother and Santos are siblings.}{\insrsid9779984   }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
Transcript, vol. XII of XXV, p. 26 (Trial, April 25, 2000)}{\insrsid9779984 .}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XII of XXV, pp. 26-27 (Trial, April 25, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Initially, Arnaiz denied any involvement in the crime, but acknowledged on a police sketch that the area where the remains were found was owned by his family.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  The ranch was owned by the Arnaiz family and not by the Santos family.}{
\insrsid9779984   }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 Transcript, vol. XII of XXV, pp.  81-82 (Trial, April 25, 2000)}{\insrsid9779984 .}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Arnaiz also admitted that Santos knew where the ranch was located.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [6]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab On September 13, 1999, in an unrelated drug case, police raided a business managed by Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  brother, Ricky Duenas Santos, in Piti.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was present during the raid.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Although the police planned to interview Santos at the Hag\'e5t\'f1a precinct, Santos complained of physical ailments and was brought to the Guam Memorial Hospital.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
After receiving treatment, Santos was brought to the precinct for questioning.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was in the precinct for approximately thirty-five hours.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [7]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab On September 14, 1999, Dr. Espinola stated that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 he will never be able to say whether [the] charred skeletal human remains}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  were that of Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Dr. Espinola, however, concluded that the charred body was that of a pre-pubescent child between eight and fifteen years-old.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Judging from the lack of new plant growth in the pit, Dr. Espinola also concluded that the burning occurred before September 8, 1999.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Because the severity of the charring left no tissues or bone marrow, Dr. Espinola also determined that DNA testing and dental records analysis would not be possible.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Although Dr. Espinola could not establish the sex of the burned body, he testified that the victim most likely died from two stab wounds to the chest area. 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [8]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab On September 16, 1999 through September 17, 1999, police again questioned Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
During that time, Santos participated in a video reenactment.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In the reenactment, Santos explained the time when he was burning the chicken and dog bones in the Nevermind Road pit area.}{\insrsid3683556 
 }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Moreover, Santos also expressed how he was freely participating in the reenactment.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was released around 3:30 A.M. on September 17, 1999.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Later in the evening, around 8:30 P.M., Santos was formally arrested.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 He was magistrated in the late afternoon of September 18, 1999. 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [9]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab On September 28, 2002, Santos was indicted on the following charges:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Charge 1:\tab \tab Aggravated Murder
\par }\pard \qj \li3600\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin3600\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Special Allegation (Possession and Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission of a Felony)
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Charge 2 (2 counts):\tab Aggravated Murder
\par }\pard \qj \li3600\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin3600\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Special Allegation (Possession and Use of a Deadly Weapon in the Commission of a Felony).
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [10]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos filed a motion with the trial court for the appointment of an independent forensic pathologist, which was denied.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  In conjunction with
 this motion, Santos also filed the following motions for the appointments of experts from the following fields: Motion for Expert on Methamphetamine and its effect (granted); Motion for a Fire and Arson Expert (denied); Motion for a Chamorro Language Tra
nslator (granted-limited to translate the conversation between victim}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
s grandmother and alleged tipper); and, Motion for Disclosure of Criminal, Juvenile, Arrest, Parole, and Probation Records (a hearing was held on February 29, 2000 regarding this motion, but it was rendered moot).}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos also filed a motion for a change of venue or in the alternative for the sequestration of the jury.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The motion for a change of venue was denied, but the jury was eventually sequestered before deliberation.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, Santos filed a motion to suppress the following statements:}{\insrsid9779984 

\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1.\tab Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements made on September 4, 1999. 
\par 2.\tab Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements made on September 13, 1999 and September 14, 1999.
\par 3.\tab Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements made on September 16, 1999.
\par 4.\tab All of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements made after September 4, 1999.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par After a hearing, the motion to suppress was denied on March 28, 2000.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [11]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab A jury trial was held and on May 23, 2000, the jury found Santos guilty of two charges of Aggravated Murder and three charges of the Special Allegation of possessio
n and use of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 For the Aggravated Murder conviction, Santos was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and was fined $10,000.00.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 For the Special Allegation of possession and used of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony, Santos was sentenced to an additional twenty-five years imprisonment and fined another $5,000.00.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [12]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos filed a timely notice of appeal on September 8, 2000.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In this appeal, Santos seeks a reversal of hi
s conviction based on several grounds.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 II.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [13]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  3107 and 3108 (1994) and Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  130.60 (1993).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 III.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [14]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab 
On appeal, Santos challenges his convictions by arguing that the trial court erred: (1) in denying his motion for the appointment of a forensic pathologist; (2) in curtailing the cross-examination of Arnaiz and in not }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
sua sponte}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  providing the jury with an 
informer instruction; (3) in admitting the statements he made to the police; and, (4) in denying his motion for a change of venue and in commenting to the jury about the reason why they were being sequestered.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 A.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appointment of a Forensic Pathologist}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [15]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The first issue that we address is whether the trial court erred in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for the appointment of a forensic pathologist.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We review the denial of a }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 request for public funds to hire an expert}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  for an abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States. v. Labansat}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 94 F.3d 527, 530 (9th Cir. 1996) (citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The defendant }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
must show that the lack of an expert deprived him of effective assistance of counsel. . . . [by] demonstrat[ing] }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 both}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 that reasonably competent counsel would have required the assistance of the requested expert for a paying client, }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 and}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  that he was prejudiced by the lack of expert assistance.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Labansat, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
94 F.3d at 530 (citations omitted) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Prejudice must be shown by clear and convincing evidence.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [16]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Because this matter is one of first impression for our court, we comprehensively set out the principles surrounding this area.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Our starting point is the Guam statutes, which address the appointment of an expert witness for an indigent defendant in Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  75.15 (1993).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Section 75.15 provides in pertinent part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The court shall order at any time that a subpoena be issued for service on a named witness upon the ex parte application of a defendant and }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a satisfactory showing that the defendant is financially unable to pay the fees of the witness and that the presence of the witness is necessary to an adequate defense}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 If the court orders the subp
oena to be issued the costs incurred by the process and the fees of the witness so subpoenaed shall be paid in the same manner in which similar costs and fees are paid in case of a witness subpoenaed [sic] in behalf of the government.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  75.15 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
At the federal level, there is a parallel provision, Title 18 USC }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 3006A(e)(1) (2001), which addresses an indigent defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s right to a public funded expert witness.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 That provision provides in relevant part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Counsel for a person who is }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 financially unable}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  to obtain investigative, }
{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 expert}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , or other services }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 necessary for adequate representation}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 may request them in an ex parte application. Upon finding, after appropriate inquiry in an ex parte proceeding, that the services are }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 necessary and that the person is financially unable to obtain them}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , the court, or the United States magistrate if the services are required in connection with a matter over which he has jurisdiction, shall authorize counsel to obtain the services.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par 18 USC }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  3006A(e)(1) (emphasis added).}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote 
\pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Both the Guam and Federal statutes are note
d because federal case law is rich in cases, which interpret this statute and address this issue.}{\insrsid9779984  
\par }}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [17]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The analytical framework that we extract from both the Guam and federal statutes is that in order for a defendant to have a right to an expert witness
 paid with public funds, the defendant must prove that he is (1) financially unable to obtain the witness, and (2) that the witness is }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 necessary }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to the defendant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s representation or defense.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Because Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  indigent status is not in dispute, we confine our examination to the remaining issue of whether Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  request for an expert pathologist was necessary for his defense.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In this regard, we are aided by the seminal case of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake v. Oklahoma}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 470 U.S. 68, 105 S. Ct. 1087 (1985), amply cited by both parties.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [18]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , the United States Supreme Court held that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 when a d
efendant demonstrates . . . that his sanity at the time of the offense is to be a significant factor at trial, the State must . . . assure the defendant access to a competent psychiatrist who will conduct an appropriate examination and assist in 
{\*\bkmkstart Document0zzSDUNumber31}{\*\bkmkend Document0zzSDUNumber31}evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 470 U.S. at 83, 105 S. Ct. at 1096.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In determining whether a defendant has established the necessity for the ap
pointment of an expert, the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 court focused on the following three factors:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 first}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 is the private interest that will be affected by the action of the State.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 second}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 is the governmental interest that will be affected if the safeguard is to be provided.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 third}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 is the probable value of the additional or substitute procedural safeguards that are sought, and the risk of an erroneous deprivation of the affected interest if those safeguards are not provided.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . at 77, 105 S. Ct. at 1093 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [19]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Although }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 addressed a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s access to a psychiatrist, Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  brief correctly notes that the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 analysis has been extended in subsequent case
s, which have held that the defendant had the right to the appointment of other types of expert witnesses.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 However, there have also been several cases, which have similarly embraced the }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Ake}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  analysis but have contrarily held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s request for an expert witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Hicks v. Commonwealth, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 670 S.W.2d 837, 838 (Ky. 1984) (defendant was not prejudiced by the non-appointment of a defense serologist); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Smith v. Commonwealth,}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  734 S.W.2d 437, 448 (Ky. 1987) (defendant was not entitled to a }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 pathologist}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  or ballistic expert); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Simmons v. Commonwealth}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 746 S.W.2d 393, 395 (Ky. 1988) (defendant was not entitled to the appointment of two independent psychiatrist, two independent psychologist, and one licensed clinical social worker); }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Moore v. Johnson}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 225 F.3d 495, 502-03 (5th Cir. 2000) (defendant was n
ot entitled to both a state-provided expert assistance in jury selection or in the development of the mitigation evidence).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, there are also a number of cases where a trial court}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial of a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s request for an independent investigator were upheld.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Smith}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 893 F.2d 1573, 1580-81 (9th Cir. 1990); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Smith v. Enomoto}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 615 F.2d 1251, 1252 (9th Cir. 1980); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Davis}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 582 F.2d 947, 951-52 (5th Cir. 1978); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Mundt}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 508 F.2d 904, 908 (10th Cir. 1974).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [20]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the case at bar, Santos requested a government-paid forensic pathologist.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The trial court denied the request because it found that Santos did not make an adequate showing of reasonableness, necessity, and benefit to warrant the appointment of another forensic pathologist, especially when Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  counsel was able to freely examine Dr. Espinola}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s findings and question him during interviews and cross-examination.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The trial court was also unconvinced by Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 claim that Dr. Espinola should automatically be considered biased based on his status as a government employee.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We agree with the trial court and hold that it did not a
buse its discretion when it denied Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  request.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
We base our holding on the following two rationales.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [21]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab First, Santos fails to demonstrate how }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 he was prejudiced by the lack of expert assistance.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Labansat, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 94 F.3d at 530 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In the}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Labansat}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 case, repeatedly cited by Santos, the court upheld the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial of a defendant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s motion for the appointment of an expert witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Labansat}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  court not only held that the defendant must show }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 by clear and convincing evidence that he was prejudiced by the lack of expert testimony,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  but also that the lack of the expert witness }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
deprived [the defendant]. . . of effective assistance of counsel.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The record before us does not establish that the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion prejudiced Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Instead, we find that Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  counsel was able to effectively challenge Dr. Espinola}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s findings and conclusions without the appointment of another pathologist.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
See State v. Newton}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 347 S.E.2d 81, 83-84 (N.C. Ct. App. 1986) (noting that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [t]here are usually other methods by which defense counsel himself, without the use of investigators or experts, can uncover information or educate himself regarding a particular scientific discipline.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In fact, the record reflects that Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 counsel was able to consult with other types of experts, who may have aided him in addressing issues that arise in the identification of charred remains.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. I of XXV, p. 33 (Motions Hearing, February 29, 2000) (defense counsel noting consultation with other experts such as firefighters); Transcript, vol. I of XXV, p. 37 (Motions Hearing, February 29, 2000) (defense counsel noting, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ve also consulted with other experts in this case and they don}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 t believe that that}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s a proper identification.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [22]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Moreover, we find this case factually distinguishable from }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Sommers v. Commonwealth}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 843 S.W.2d 879 (Ky. 1992), cited by Santos, wherein the defendant was bombarded by the state}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 six}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  expert witnesses, who were uncooperative towards the defendant.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . at 884-85.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In the instant case, the government}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s expert witness with respect to this issue was the Chief Medical Examiner of Guam, whom Santos was able to freely question and interview, as he would his own witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Neither the transcripts below, nor Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 brief indicates that Dr. Espinola was uncooperative during any interview or cross-examination.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See State v. Swallow}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 405 N.W.2d 29, 42 (S.D. 1987) (}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
[Defendant] does not cite a single example where his cross-examination was inhibited by a failure to consult with an expert.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [23]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Second, Santos has not established that he was deprived of an effective defense.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s extensive cross-examination of Dr. Espinola regarding his findings and how they were derived demonstrates that the non-appointment of another pathologist did not deprive Santos of an effective defense.}{\insrsid3683556  }
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s effectiveness was illustrated with Dr. Espinola}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s admission during cross-examination that he was unable to determine that the body was really Hermie}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XX of XXV, p. 102 (Trial, May 8, 
2000); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also Woodard v. State}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 743 P.2d 662, 664 (Okla. Crim. App. 1987) (finding that defendant was not deprived of the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 basic tools}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  of his defense because defense counsel was able to effectively attack the expert}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s conclusions during the extensive cross-examination).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [24]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Additionally, although Santos contends that the purpose of the appoi
ntment of another pathologist was to establish the existence of chicken and dog bones, the record reveals that such an issue was closely explored during trial by the government counsel.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. XX of XXV, pp. 28-41, 49-59 (Trial, May 8, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The government counsel consistently scrutinized Dr. Espinola about the existence of dog or chicken bones, or the bones of perhaps another person in the pit.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Consequently, Santos was not precluded from developing this specific defense theory during trial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In this respect, we find the case cited by Santos, }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Pierce}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 488 S.E.2d 576 (N.C. 1997), dispositive, where the court affirmed the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial of defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s request for an independent psychiatrist, independent }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 pathologist}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , and medical expert in a child abuse murder case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Pierce}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , the defendant requested that the court appoint an independent pathologist to review the state}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s pathologist report, to inform defense counsel of }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 any possible defenses,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 and to assist counsel in determining how the victim}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s injuries were inflicted.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Pierce}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 488 S.E.2d at 583.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In affirming the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial, the court reasoned that:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [m]ere hope or suspicion of the availability of certain evidence that might erode the State}{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s case or buttress a defense will not suffice to satisfy the requirement that defendant demonstrate a threshold showing of specific necessity for expert assistance}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . . . . Similarly, undeve
loped assertions that the requested expert assistance would be beneficial or even essential to the preparing of an adequate defense are insufficient to satisfy this threshold requirement.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  at 583-84 (alteration in original) (internal quotations and citations omitted) (emphasis added). 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [25]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In view of the above, Santos has failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion for the appointment of another forensic pathologist.
}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos has not proffered any evidence that his defense counsel could not effectively challenge Dr. Espinola}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s findings through effective interview or cross-examination.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Moore}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 225 F.3d at 503 (}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
[A] defendant cannot expect the state to provide him a most-sophisticated defense; rather, he is entitled to }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 access to the raw materials integral to the building of an effective defense.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Most of those raw materials come . . . in the form of his court-appointed lawyer--in his expert knowledge about how to negotiate the rules of court, how to mount an effective defense, and so forth.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 request for the appointment of a forensic pathologist.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 B.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Arnaiz}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Testimony}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [26]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The second set of issues we address relates to Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s testimony.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos asserts that the trial court erred in curtailing the defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s cross-examination of Arnaiz, and in failing to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 provide an informer instruction to the jury.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Curtailment of Cross-Examination}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [27]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos contends that the trial court erred when it curtailed the defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s cross-examination of Arnaiz during trial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We disagree.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The Government properly argues that Arnaiz had already been subjected to an extremely vigorous cross-examination for several days, and that the jurors already had sufficient time to evaluate Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s credibility.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [28]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The scope of cross-examination lies in the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Carol M.D.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 948 P.2d 837, 846 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997) (quoting }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Campbell}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 691 P.2d 929, 940 (Wash. 1984)); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Noti}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 731
 F.2d 610, 612 (9th Cir 1984).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s broad discretion to }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 preclude repetitive and unduly harassing interrogation,}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Davis v. Alaska, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
415 U.S. 308, 316, 94 S. Ct. 1105, 1110 (1974), is reflected in section 611 of the Guam Rules of Evidence, w}{\insrsid3683556 hich provides in relevant part:}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (a)}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Control by court.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, (2) avoid needless consumption of ti
me, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (b)}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Scope of cross-examination.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Cross-examination should be limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The court may
, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  611(a), (b) (1994).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 However, because }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [c]ross-examination is the principal means by which the believability of a witness and the truth of his testimony are tested,}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Davis}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 415 U.S. at 316, 94 S. Ct. at 1110, in the exercise of their discretion, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
the court may not prejudice a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Carol}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 948 P.2d at 846.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The court should also not preclude the defendant from developing his defense.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See United States v. Lopez-Alvarez}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 970 F.2d 583, 588-89 (9th Cir. 1992).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [29]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the instant appeal, Santos lists the following four instances when the trial court erred in curtailing defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s cross-examination of Arnaiz: (1) Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use; (2) Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s attempt to get a plea agreement for his uncle, Ricky Santos; (3) Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s outstanding warrant for a traffic violation; and, (4) Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s admission to Officer Nueva regarding his attempt to hide from the police when they were investigating the case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Upon close examination of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  arguments, however, we are conv
inced that Santos has only properly brought before us the first instance, the alleged curtailment of questioning with respect to Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In light of the abuse of discretion}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s high standard}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
In the context of an evidentiary ruling, abuse of discretion exists when the reviewing court is firmly convinced that a mistake has been made regarding admission of evidence.  
However, even if a mistake has been made, a new trial will not be granted unless the evidence would have caused a different outcome at trial.}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid9779984  }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 Polk v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc.}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 , 876 F.2d 527, 532 (6th Cir. 1989) (citations omitted); }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 see People v. Fisher}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 , 2001 Guam 2, }{
\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  7, 19.}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 and Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  failure to substantiate his allegation, we will summarily dispos}{\insrsid3683556 
e of the other three instances.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Drug Use }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [30]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos maintains that the trial court erred when it curtailed his defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s impeachment of Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s character during cross-examination of his alleged drug use.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The questions regarding Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use arose during defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s cross-examination about why Arnaiz was placed on administrative duty status.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 45 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Although the Government argued that Arnaiz was placed on administrative duty for his prior family violence case, defense counsel argued that Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s administrative duty status was a result of his drug problem and was, therefore, admissible as a bad act.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 45 (
Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 After excusing the jury and listening to both counsels}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  arguments, the trial court limited cross-examination of Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s drug use to the effects on his memory, but not with respect to his truthfulness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in this regard.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [31]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Evidence impeaching a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  character may be admitted pursuant to Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  607, 608, and 609.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  404(a)(3) (1995).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party . . . .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  607 (1994).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Because Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s alleged drug use did not re
sult in any conviction, Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  609, entitled }{\ul\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Impeachment by Evidence of Convictions of Crime}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , is inapposite.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In construing the admissibility of Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use, Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  608(b), however, is relevant and provides:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Specific instances of conduct.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting his credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
They may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 cross-examination of the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  (1) concerning his character for 
}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 truthfulness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The giving of testimony, whether by an accused or by any 
other witness, does not operate as a waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination when examined with respect to matters which relate only to credibility.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  608(b) (1994) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In d
etermining whether section 608(b) applies to this case, we must inquire whether Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s drug use is relevant to his truthfulness or lack of truthfulness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [32]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The case of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Clemons, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
32 F.3d 1504 (11th Cir. 1994), noted by the trial court during its deliberation on this matter, is instructive to our inquiry.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Clemons,}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  the court concluded that a question regarding a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 drug use was inadmissible for two reasons.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 First, the court could not find the relevance in admitting such evidence except for attacking the character of the witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Clemons, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 32 F.3d at 1511.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Second, the court has }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 long adhered to the proposition that a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  use of drugs may not be used to attack his general credibility, but only his ability to perceive the underlying events and to testify lucidly at trial.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id. }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (citing }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Sellers, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
906 F.2d 597, 602 (11th Cir. 1990)).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Moreover, in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Robinson}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 956 F.2d 1388 (7th Cir. 1992), the court also noted that the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
district court may bar cross-examination about a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  illegal drug use when it is used }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 for the sole purpose of making a general character attack.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  at 1397 (citations omitted).
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [33]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Because there is a general concern that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 evidence that a witness [who] has used illegal drugs may so prejudice the jury that it will excessively discount the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [] testimony,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 cross-examination regarding a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  drug use has been limited to impeachment of the witness}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  perception and memory, but not on the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  ability to tell the truth.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Neely}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 980 F.2d 1074, 1081 (7th Cir.1992).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Accordingly, section 608(b) did not render Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use admissible since it is not relevant for his truthfulness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Therefore, we hold that the t
rial court did not abuse its discretion when it limited defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s cross-examination of Arnaiz}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s drug use to the effect on his memory.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri2160\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin2160\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li2160\ri2160\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin2160\lin2160\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 b.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Plea Agreement for Arnaiz}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s uncle, Ricky Santos; Outstanding Warrant; Hiding from Police}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [34]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab As we expressed above, Santos identifies three other instances during cross-examination where the trial court allegedly erred in curtailing Arnaiz}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s cross-examination.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Given the }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 high degree of deference}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  we accord }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
to the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s decision to suppress or admit evidence,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  we }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 will not find error absent a clear abuse of discretion resulting in prejudice.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Cassibry v. Schlautman}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 816 So. 2d 398, 403 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see People v. Fisher}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 2001 Guam 2 at }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  7.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We follow the reasoning of }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Loncar v. Gray}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , which expressed, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
[t]o prevail on [the] appeal of the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s evidentiary decisions, [defendant] }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 must show that those decisions were erroneous and had a substantial influence on the outcome of the case}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Loncar v. Gray}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 28 P.3d 928, 930 (Alaska 2001) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, we are unable to find that the trial court abused its discretion during the three instances that Santos outlines because Santos has failed to demonstrate how the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s alleged error resulted in prejudice.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [35]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab First, Santos claims that the trial court should have allowed questions pertaining to Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s alleged attempt to get a plea agreement for Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s other uncle and Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  brother, Ricky.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 75 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 According to the trial transcripts, the defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s purpose in presenting this evidence was to reveal a potential bias in Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s testimony.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 73 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Although Santos contends the trial court erred by precluding such evidence, he fails to explain how the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s exclusion of this evidence affected his right to a fair trial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, Santos does not present any arguments why 
the trial court erred when it sustained the Government counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s objection based on 6 GCA }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  403 grounds.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [36]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Next, Santos alleges that the trial court erred when it limited questions regarding Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s warrant for a traffic violation.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 80 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Although defense counsel at trial acknowledged that Arnaiz already paid the fine and that there was no conviction, he wanted to introduce it as a prior bad act.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
As explained above, pursuant to 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  608(b), a witness can only be impe
ached by evidence of a prior bad act if that evidence pertains to the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 truthfulness or untruthfulness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 As argued by the Government}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s counsel at trial, the traffic violation is not only irrelevant to the matter, but does not touch on the veracity of the witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
More importantly, Santos again fails to present to this court how Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 overall defense was adversely impacted because of this matter. 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [37]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Lastly, Santos contends that the trial court erred when it precluded the admission of Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement to Officer Nueva regarding his attempt to hide from the police when they were investigating this case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, pp. 81-91 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The trial court ruled the evidence inadmissible based on hearsay.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
During trial, defense counsel argued that Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s statement to the officer was admissible pursuant to 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  801(d)(1).}{
\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
 It is undisputed that Arnaiz}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s alleged statement to Officer Nueva was made out of court and 
was being used to prove the truth of the matter asserted.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 See }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 Title 6 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
 801(c) (1994).}{\insrsid9779984  }}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XIV of XXV, p. 87 (Trial, April 27, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We agree with the trial court}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s ruling.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Section 801(d)(1) provides in relevant part:}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Statements which are not hearsay.}{\insrsid3683556  A statement is not hearsay if-}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (1) Prior statement by witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cr
oss-examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (A) inconsistent with his testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, or (B) consistent with his testimo
ny and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against him of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par Title 6 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  801(d)(1) (1994).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We find that Arnaiz}
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s alleged statement to the officer did not fall under the scope of section 801(d)(1) because the statement was neither an inconsistent statement made }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 under oath}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  nor a consistent statement }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 offered to rebut}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  a recent fabrication. Therefore, section 801(d)(1) did not provide the exclusion that would make the statement non-hearsay.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it precluded the admissibility of the statement.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [38]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In sum, although we uphold a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s right }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to be confronted with the witnesses against him,}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and to an }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 opportunity for effective cross-examination,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  we similarly recognize that a defendant does not have the right to }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
cross-examination that is effective in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 whatever way}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , and }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to whatever extent}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , the defense might wish.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Delaware v. Van Arsdall}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 475 U.S. 673, 679, 106 S. Ct. 1431, 1435 (1986) (emphasis added) (quotations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 A review of Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s testimony, especially focusing on the instances that Santos points to during cross-examination, does not demonstrate that Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  right to an effective confrontation of the witness was curtailed.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion during Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s cross-examination.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Informer Instructions}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [39]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos next challenges his conviction based on his contention that the trial court erred by not }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 providing an informer instruction to the jury.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  The Government asserts that the informer instruction was not necessary and that the trial court did not need to raise the issue }{
\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 sua sponte}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 .  Contrary to Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  contention, Arnaiz}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s testimony was corroborated by other 
witnesses such as Anthony Concepcion.  The Government further argues that the instructions at the end of trial, which discussed the credibility of witnesses, impeachment, and factors to consider in proving eyewitness testimony were sufficient.}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos contends that Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s testimony was so }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 problematic}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  that the trial court should have provided an informer instruction notwithstanding defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s failure to request for one during trial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We disagree.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [40]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We review a trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s failure to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  provide a jury instruction for plain error.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 People v. Camacho}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 1999 Guam 27, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  15 (citing Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  90.19, 130.50 (1993)).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Plain error is defined as }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
[a]ny error, defect, irregularity or variance which does not affect substantial rights . . . .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  130.50(a) (1993).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 For the following two reasons, we find that the trial court did not err when it failed to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 provide an informer instruction to the jury.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [41]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab First, Arnaiz}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s status as an informer was not fully established.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Monzon-Valenzuela}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 186 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 1999), the court expressed that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
[t]he informant instruction applies only to witnesses }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
who provide evidence against a defendant for some personal advantage or vindication, as well as for pay or immunity.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  186 F.3d at 1183 (quoting }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Guam v. Dela Rosa}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 644 F.2d 1257, 1259 (9th Cir. 1980)).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The mere implication that Arnaiz may have received some incentive for his testimony against Santos is insufficient to confer upon him informer status.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [42]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Second, assuming}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  arguendo}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  that Arnaiz
 was an informer, the failure to provide an informer instruction is not reversible error if the court provided alternative instructions regarding the credibility of a witness.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
This principle is articulated in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Brown}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 454 F.2d 397 (9th Cir. 1972), where the court reasoned:}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
While a specific accomplice instruction would have provided more guidance, the trial judge did instruct the jury with care regarding the credibility of witnesses, telling them to carefully scrutinize the testimony given, a
nd in so doing, consider all the circumstances under which any witness has testified . . . [including the] relation [of] the Government, or the defendant to the witness; and the manner in which he or she might be affected by the verdict; and the extent of
 contradiction or corroboration by other evidence, if any . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Brown}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 454 F.2d at 399 (alterations in original) (internal quotations and citations omitted); s}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ee also United States v. McSweaney}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 507 F.2d 298, 301 (9th Cir. 1974) (finding appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s contention that the conviction should be reversed because {\*\bkmkstart Document0zzSDUNumber9}{\*\bkmkend Document0zzSDUNumber9}the district court did not give an accomplice instruction }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  to be without merit because the court instructed the jury to }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
carefully scrutinize the testimony given,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and in doing so to consider, inter alia, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 the extent of contradiction or corroboration by other evidence.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 )}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [43]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the instant matter, the jury was instructed on how to properly assess the credibility of the witnesses as denoted in Jury Instruction No. 4D, Credibility of Wit
ness, which provides in pertinent part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In deciding what the facts are, you must consider all the evidence.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In doing this, you must decide what testimony to believe and what testimony not to believe.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 You may disbelieve all or part of any witness}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  testimony}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In making that decision, you may take into account a number of factors, including the following:
\par . . .}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 3.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 What was the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  manner while testifying?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 4.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Did the witness have an interest in the outcome of this case or any bias or prejudice concerning any party or any matter involved in the ca}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 se?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 5.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 How reasonable was the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  testimony considered in light of all the evidence in the case?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 6.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Was the witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  testimony contradicted by what that witness had said or done at another time, or by the testimony of other witnesses, or by other evidence?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab 10, p. 32 (Jury Instruction 4D).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, a jury instruction was also provided regarding a government witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  potential bias and hostility, as stated in Jury Instruction No. 4I, Bias and Hostility, which provides:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In connection with your evaluation of the credibility of the witness, you should specifically consider evidence of resentment or anger with some }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 government witnesses}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 may have towards the defendant.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Evidence that a witness is }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 biased, prejudiced or hostile }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
toward the defendant requires you to view that witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 testimony with caution, to weigh with care, and subject it to close and searching scrutiny.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab 13, p. 38 (Jury Instruction 4I) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 As reflected from the jury instructions that were given, the jury was fully apprised of issues and factors pertaining to a witness}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  credibility and their potential bias and hostility.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequently, we find that the trial court did not err by failing to }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 provide for a more specific informer instruction.}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 C.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Motion to Suppress}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [44]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We next address the denial of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motions to suppress the statements he made to the police on various dates.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We examine whether the trial court erred in not suppressing Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements based on the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 doctrine, the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule, and the fruits o}{\insrsid3683556 f the poisonous tree principle.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  
\par }\pard \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri2160\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin2160\lin2160\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri4\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin4\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [45]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We review a motion to suppress }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 de novo}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 People v. Sangalang, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2001 Guam 18, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 10 (citing }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 People v. Hualde}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 1999 Guam 3, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  19).}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Additionally, we review }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 the voluntariness of a waiver of }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 Miranda }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 rights}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 de novo}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 .}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984   }{
\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 Sangalang, }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 2001 Guam 18 at }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  10}{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 .}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
  The determination of whether a }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 waiver was knowing and intelligent is reviewed for clear error.}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984   }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 Id.}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Hualde}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 1999 Guam 3 at }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  20 (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 To safeguard the uncounseled individual}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 the United States Supreme Court held in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 suspects interrogated while in police custody must be told that they have a right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against 
them in court, and that they are entitled to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed, at the interrogation.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thompson v. Keohane, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 516 U.S. 99, 107, 116 S. Ct. 457, 462 (1995) (citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 However, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 police officers are not required to administer }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  warnings to everyone whom they question.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Oregon v. Mathiason, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 429 U.S. 492, 495, 97 S. Ct. 711, 714 (1977).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Nor is the requirement of warnings to be imposed simply because the questioning takes place in the station house, or because the questioned person is one whom the police suspect.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  warnings are required only where there has been such a restriction on a person}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s freedom as to render him }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 in custody.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri4\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin4\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Statements made between September 3, 1999 to September 4, 1999.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [46]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The first statement that Santos seeks to suppress based on }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 violations stems from Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 contact with the police that started at 2:15 A.M. on September 3, 1999 and ended at 9:30 P.M. on September 4, 1999.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  contact with the police was triggered after Captain Paul Suba}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Suba}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ) interview with Pangelinan, who claimed that she had last seen her son with Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. II of XXV, pp. 10, 13 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 After contacting Santos on September 3, 1999, the police brought him to the precinct in a marked vehicle and without handcuffs.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 19 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Suba testified and Santos does not dispute that he voluntarily went to the precinct.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 17 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000); Transcript, v
ol. IV of XXV, p. 44 (Trial, March 16, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Inside the precinct, Santos was placed in an interview room, which contained no windows, one entrance, a single doorknob, and a latch on the exterior of the door.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 49 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Initially, Suba and another officer, Caliyo, interviewed Santos, however, they left after thirty minutes because Suba felt that, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 it didn}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 t seem like [Santos] wanted to say anything.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Trial Transcripts, vol. II of XXV, p. 20 (Mo}{\insrsid3683556 tions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [47]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 second interview occurred in the early morning of September 4, 1999 with officers Anna Theresa Eustaquio (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Eustaquio}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ) and Sacha Hertlestt (hereinafter }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Hertslet}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 49 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Because Santos claimed that his writing and grammar skills were poor, he asked if he could just dictate his statement.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 49 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was informed that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 he wasn}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 t under arrest,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and responded affirmatively when asked by the officers, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 if he}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s willing to help us out on the case.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 49 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556 
 }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 According to Hertslet, Santos responded that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
he had really nothing else to do . . . [and] wasn}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 t planning on going anywhere.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 50 (Mo}{\insrsid3683556 tions Hearing, March 14, 2000).
}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [48]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Eustaquio transcribed Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  detail of the events that transpired during and after Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s disappearance.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, pp. 49-52, 96-99 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
During this time, Santos was able to make corrections to his statement and take breaks.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 53 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 At no time during the interview did he request to be taken back to his home.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 100 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos signed each page of the statement, and on the first page of the Statement form, Santos initialed the crossed-out portion which read, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 AFTER BEING ADVISED AND UNDERSTANDING MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The officers claimed that because Santos was not a suspect, they informed him that they crossed-out that portion of the form.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 99 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos, however, initialed the following clause, which stated, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 I AM GIVING THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [49]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Shortly thereafter, Santos was taken to the Tiyan precinct to have his alibi verified by Arnaiz.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 59 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
At that time, Santos was provided breakfast, was placed in a room where he read the newspaper, and was free to go to the bathroom next door.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II 
of XXV, pp. 60-61 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Around 7:50 A.M, Santos requested to go home, but he was not taken home until 9:30 A.M. because another interview with Sgt. Joseph G. Baleto (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Baleto}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ) was scheduled.}{\insrsid3683556  
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Before the interview, Santos was not read his rights because Baleto assumed that Santos was already }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mirandized}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
. Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 117 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [50]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In 
the case at bar, Santos asserts that he was unlawfully detained by police when he was held at the Tiyan precinct for nineteen hours and thirty minutes, and argues that he should have been read his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights before he was questioned.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We agree.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The admissibility of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  September 3, 1999 through September 4, 1999 statements is contingent on whether Santos was in custody.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The issue of }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 whether a suspect is }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 in custody,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and therefore entitled to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 warnings, presents a mixed question of law and fact qualifying for independent review.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thompson, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
516 U.S. at 102, 116 S. Ct. at 460.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [51]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In determining whether or not a defendant was in custody for the purposes of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights, }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thompson v. Keohane, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 516 U.S. 99, 116 S. Ct. 457 (1995) is instructive.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thompson}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , the United States Supreme Court set forth two discrete inquiries to ascertain whether a person is }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 in custody.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The first inquiry is, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 what were the circumstances surrounding the interrogation.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . at 112, 116 S. Ct. at 465.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The second inquiry is, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
given those circumstances, would a reasonable person have felt he or she was not at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ; }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also Oregon v. Elstad}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 470 U.S. 298, 310, 105 S. Ct. 1285, 1293 (1985).}{\insrsid3683556 
 }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 After addressing the two inquiries, the court must then resolve }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
the ultimate inquiry,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  which is, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [was] there a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thompson, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 516 U.S. at 112, 116 S. Ct. at 465 (alteration in original).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Based on the following two rationales, we disagree with the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s conclusion that Santos was not in custody and that the police were not required to read him his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [52]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab 
First, when we consider that Santos was in the precinct for over nineteen hours and was interviewed by various officers at three separate times, it is difficult to conclude that a reasonable person in Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  position would have felt free to leave.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The United States Supreme Court in }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Mendenhall, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 446 U.S. 544, 100 S. Ct. 1870 (1980), found that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a person has been }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 seized}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mendenhall}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ,}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
46 U.S. at 554, 100 S. Ct. at 1877.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, Santos was brought by the police to the precinct in the early hours of the morning and was shifted among various officers during questioning.}{\insrsid3683556  }
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Even Suba admitted that he stopped the interview because he felt that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 it didn}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 t seem like [Santos] wanted to say anything.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 20 (Mo}{\insrsid3683556 tions Hearing, March 14, 2000).
}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [53]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Second, although the officers claimed to have communicated to Santos that he was free to leave at anytime, as noted in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Stansbury v. California}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 511 U.S. 318, 114 S. Ct. 1526 (1994), the officers}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
beliefs are relevant only to the extent they would affect how a reasonable person in the position of the individual being questioned would gauge the breadth of his or her freedom of action.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Stansbury}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ,}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 511 U.S. 
at 325, 114 S. Ct. at 1530 (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, the officers insisted that Santos was free to leave.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
However, Santos was placed in a windowless room with one door, which could be locked from the outside.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, Santos was brought to the other precinct so that Arnaiz could attest to Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  alibi.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
More importantly, although Santos requested that he be taken home at 7:50 A.M., he was not taken home until two hours later and only after another officer interviewed him.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
This reflects that Santos was really not free to leave the precinct, and that if he had insisted on leaving he would have most likely been physically restrained.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Dunaway v. New York, }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 442 U.S. 200, 212, 99 S.
 Ct. 2248, 2256 (1979) (finding that the defendant was seized because, even though he was not told he was under arrest, he would have been physically restrained if he had refused to accompany the officers or had tried to escape their custody.); }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also Mendenhall, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
446 U.S. at 554, 100 S. Ct. at 1877 (stating that an example of a circumstance that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, is the threatening presence of several officers .).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [54]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In view of the above circumstances surrounding Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  contact with police officers between September 3, 1999 and September 4, 1999, we find that Santos was in custody, and that the trial court erred in holding that the police were not required to read Santos his }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rights before the officers questioned him.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Because we find that Santos should have been read his }{\i\fs20\insrsid9779984 Miranda }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
rights, we need not address the issue of whether Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  statement was freely given.}}}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [55]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab However, notwithstanding our finding, we find that the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s error was harmless and was not fatal to the Government}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s case against Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Our finding of harmless error is based on two grounds.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 First, Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements were exculpatory, not inculpatory.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Nova v. Bartlett}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 211 F.3d 705, 708 (2nd Cir. 2000) (affirming the trial court }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
solely on the ground that [defendant] did not make any inculpatory statements prior to receiving his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 warning and that his later, post-warning confessions were admissible at trial.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos did not confess or implicate himself in the commission of the crime during any of his September 3-4 statements.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 29 (}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mr. Santos never admitted complicity in the murder or disappearance of Hermie Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In fact, he always denied it.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
This is also reflected in the fact that Santos was not formally arrested during this first encounter with the police.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [56]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Second, and more importantly, Santos repeated the substance of the September 3-4 statements on at least two other occasions discussed
 below, wherein we find that the trial court correctly did not suppress Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  statements.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Pittman v. Tahash}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 170 N.W.2d 445, 448 (Minn. 1969) (finding that although defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s first confession was made in absence of warnings, sufficient evidence supported lack of taint in the second confession made several hours later).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Thus, even if we found any substantive information in Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 September 3-4 statements, the information was ultimately and inevitably revealed to the police in later statements given by Santos.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Nix v. Williams}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 467 U.S. 431, 443-44, 104 S. Ct. 2501, 2508-09 (1984) (adopting the inevitable or ultimate discovery exception to the exclusionary rule). Accordingly, we hold the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 Motion to suppress the September 3-4 statements was harmless error.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri2160\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin2160\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 b.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Statements made between September 13, 1999 and September 14, 1999.

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [57]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The second statement that Santos seeks to suppress based on }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
arose from the execution of a search warrant at Ricky Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 auto shop in Piti in an unrelated drug case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, pp. 126-127 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Because Santos was in the shop during the execution of the search warrant, the police brought Santos to the precinct for more questioning.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Santos was first taken to the hospital, however, because he complained of pains in the facial area.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, pp. 131-134 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 According to Officer J.S. Carbullido (hereinafter }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Officer Carbullido}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ), when they finally arrived at the precinct, Santos was willing to talk and was even provided lunch.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 134 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was then read and provided the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 GPD Constitutional rights form,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  which he signed at around 1:13 P.M., as noted in Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab 2 (Custodial Interrogation, September 14, 1999), Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 134 (March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [58]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Officer Carbullido testified that Santos was free to leave the precinct at anytime, but ended up sleeping in the interview room because he did not ask to be taken home.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, pp. 143-145, 151 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
On September 14, 1999, at around 7:18 A.M., Santos was again interviewed after being apprised of his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 149 (Motions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos was eventually taken back to Piti when he expressed that he wanted to get some clothes.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. II of XXV, p. 150 (Mo}{\insrsid3683556 tions Hearing, March 14, 2000).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [59]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the present appeal, Santos argues that the September 13-14 statements he made to the police should have been suppressed.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
We disagree.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Even if we were to incorporate our previous analysis with respect to the custody issue and find that Santos was in custo
dy during this particular police encounter, we agree with the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s finding that Santos was apprised of and waived his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights as a result of him signing the waiver form.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s Excerpts of Record, Tab. F, p. 10 (Decision and Order, March 28, 2000); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also Commonwealth v. Cook}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 644 N.E.2d 203, 209 (Mass. 1994) (finding that the signing of a waiver card was sufficient to constitute a waiver of Miranda rights); Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, Tabs 2-4, (Custodial Interrogation, September 13, 1999 and September 14, 1999).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We give substantial deference to the judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s findings of fact in reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and 
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [i]n reviewing a . . . judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s determination that a voluntary waiver was made . . . .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Cook}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 644 N.E.2d at 208-09 (omission in original) (quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
We are unwilling to overturn the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s finding that Santos voluntarily waived his rights, especially when Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 brief glosses over the existence of the signed waivers, and, therefore, fails to challenge their validity.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequently, we hold that the trial court did not err in denying Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion to suppress the September 13-14 statements.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Rule.}{\b\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1418\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 September 16, 1999 statement }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [60]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The last statement that Santos claims should have been suppressed by the trial court stems from Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  participation in a video reenactment of his visit to the Nevermind Road pit, where he claims he was burning chicken and dog bones.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos argues that his video-taped statements should have been suppressed based on the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The thrust of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  claim is that when he participated 
in the video reenactment at approximately 1:57 P.M. on September 16, 1999, the police already had sufficient probable cause to arrest him.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Santos argues that his release after the reenactment and his formal arrest at 8:30 P.M. on September 17, 1999, violated the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos also contends that the trial court }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 misses the point}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  when they held that the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule was not violated because Santos was magistrated within twenty-four hours of his arrest.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s brief, p. 44.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We find Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  argument unconvincing.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [61]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule was formulated by the U.S. Supreme Court to enforce compliance with Rule 5(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Camacho}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 1999 Guam 27 at }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  29.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Under the rule, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 any evidence obtained by police during interrogation after arrest,}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  Title 8 GCA }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  20.10 (1993), provides that }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
an arrest is made by an actual restraint of the person, or by submission to the custody of the person making the arrest.}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  may not be used against that arrestee at trial where there was an unreasonable delay in bringing the arrestee before a magistrate for arraignment.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . (citing }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mallory v. United States}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S. Ct. 1356 (1957) and }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb v. United States}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 318 U.S. 332, 63 S. Ct. 608 (1943)) (footnote added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In resolving whether there has been an unreasonable delay from the time the defendant was arrested to the time he was magistrated, the twenty-four hour time limitation found in Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  45.10 has been employed.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Section 45.10 provides in pertinent part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Duty to Delivery Arrestee to Judge, or to Peace Officer.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (a) An officer making an arrest under a warrant or any p
erson making an arrest without a warrant shall take the arrested person without unnecessary delay before a judge of the Superior Court.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (c) The person arrested shall in all cases be taken before the judge within twenty-four hours a
fter the arrest, except that when the 24-hour period expires on a day when the Superior Court is not in session, the time shall be extended to include the duration of the next regular court session on the judicial day immediately following.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-720\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  45.10 (1993).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Moreover, it is through Guam}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s adoption of section 45.10 that the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule is applied on Guam }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [d]espite [sic] Congress}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  limiting the effect of this rule upon federal law enforcement.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Camacho, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1999 Guam 27 at }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  29. 

\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [62]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the present case, Santos misapplies the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 rule to support his contention that the statements contained on the September 16 video are inadmissible because at that time the statements were made, police had sufficient probable cause to arrest him.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The focus of the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule is on the unreasonable delay that occurs }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 after}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s arrest and not on whether the police had sufficient probable cause to arrest the individual.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Title 8 GCA }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  45.10; }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Camacho}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 1999 Guam 27 at }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  29-34.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Because Santos does not dispute the fact that he was arres
ted at 8:30 P.M. on September 17, 1999, and that four hours later he was magistrated, we do not find any unreasonable delay between the time of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  arrest and the time when he was magistrated.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Camacho}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 1999 Guam, 27 at }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  34.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [63]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Additionally, assuming }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 arguendo}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  that we were to adopt Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  interpretation of the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rule and accept his assert
ion that at the time of the videotaping, police had probable cause for Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 arrest, we are not compelled to find that the statements he made on the video should be suppressed.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  We note the oversight in Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s Opening Brief}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
s presentation of facts describing this event.  The Brief incorrectly states that the videotaping occurred at 12:30 P.M. on the 17th, approximately eight hours before Santos was arrested.  Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s Opening Brief, p. 44.  The video-taping actually occurred on September 16 at 1:57 P.M.  Trial Transcripts, vol. XVII of XXV, p. 59 (Trial, May 3, 2000).  In vi
ew of the fundamental importance of time and dates with respect to this issue and Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
 imprecision in this matter, Santos ineffectively argues precisely when the police had probable cause to arrest Santos, whether it was on the 17th or before the reenactment on the 16th.}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 44.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Camacho}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , we cited to the case of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Jackson}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 712 F.2d 1283 (8th Cir. 1983), where the court noted that 
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [t]he fact that a statement is obtained in violation of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mallory}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  does not . . . render it inadmissible }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 per se}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Jackson}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 712 F.2d at 1286 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 This is so because }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 delay in being taken before a magistrate has been only one factor to consider in determining whether a confession is involuntary . . . .}
{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .; }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
see also Bey v. State}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 781 A.2d 952, 961 (Md. App. 2001) (finding that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 the fact that the police did not immediately bring appellant before a commissioner because they first want
ed to question him, does not automatically lead to exclusion. Rather, we look to the totality of circumstances to determine if the confession was voluntarily given.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We also determine if the defendant executed a waiver of his rights.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The rationale underlying this waiver rule is that the fundamental concerns that led to the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mallory }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 and }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 decisions are adequately addressed by compliance with the requirements of }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , which was decided after }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Mallory }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 and }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Bell}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 740 A.2d 958, 964 (D.C. 1999)}{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, Santos does not dispute that before the reenactment, he }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 executed a waiver of his }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 rights.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 35; }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellee}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab. 4 (Custodial Interrogation, September 16, 1999).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The transcript of the reenactment clearly demonstrates that the officer reminded Santos of his constitutional right not to participate in the video, and that Santos voluntarily assented to participating.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Transcript, vol. XVII of XXV, p. 59 (Trial, May 3, 2000).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In light of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  waiver, we find that even if the police had sufficient probable cause before the reenactment, and therefore should have already arrested Santos, his }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 valid waiver of . . . [his] }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
rights [was] also a waiver of his . . . right to presentment without unnecessary delay.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Bell}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 740 A.2d at 963 (internal quotations and citations omitted) (finding that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [t]he waiver is valid even if obtained during the period of unnecessary delay}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In sum, we hold that the trial court did not err in admitting the statements made by Santos during the reenactment.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 3.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Fruits of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [64]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In a sweeping fashion, Santos argues that all of the statements that he made after September 4, 1999 should have
 been suppressed pursuant to the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Wong Sun v. United States}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S. Ct. 407 (1963), the United States Supreme Court held that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
verbal evidence which derives so immediately from an unlawful entry and an unauthorized arrest . . . is no less the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 fruit}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 of official illegality than the more common tangible fruits of the unwarranted intrusion.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Ceccolini}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 435 U.S. 268, 275, 98 S. Ct. 1054, 1059 (1978) (reaffirming and quoting }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Wong Sun v. United States}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 371 U.S. at 485, 83 S. Ct. at 416).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [65]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In this
 appeal, Santos essentially argues that because the statement he made on September 4, 1999 was illegally obtained by police, then all subsequent statements made by him days later on September 13, 14, and 16, 1999 should also be suppressed.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 argument is unpersuasive and misconstrues the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Although evidence subsequently obtained as the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 fruit}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 of a prior illegality is suppressible, the court must initially resolve }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
whether the challenged evidence was come at by exploitation of [the initial] illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary taint.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Segura v. United States}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 468 U.S. 796, 804-05, 104 S. Ct. 3380, 3385 (1984) (alteration in original) (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Subsequent statement
s made, even after an illegal arrest, are not automatically excluded if}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
intervening events break the causal connection between the illegal arrest and the confession so that the confession is sufficiently an act of free will to purge the primary taint.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Elstad}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 470 U.S. at 306, 105 S. Ct. at 1291 (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, the September 13, 14, and 16 statements were made almost two weeks after the statement Santos claims the police illegally obtained.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Although we found that the September 4, 1999 statement was illegally obtained, the time frame between the first statement and the subsequent statements was sufficient to dissipate the effect of the original illegality on the subsequent statements.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Dulier v. State}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 511 P.2d 1058, 1060 (Alaska 1973) (finding that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 the lapse of time between the first and succeeding statements was such that we are satisfied that the first statement was not causative of the second.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 As the United States Supreme Court noted, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [e]ven in such extreme cases . . . in which police forced a
 full confession from the accused through unconscionable methods of interrogation, the Court has assumed that the coercive effect of the confession could, }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 with time, be dissipated}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Elstad}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 470 U.S. at 311-12, 1
05 S. Ct. at 1294 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Also, as earlier stated, the September 4, 1999 statements were exculpatory, not inculpatory. }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See supra }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 p. 22, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  55-56.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequent
ly, unless Santos provides a nexus between the first statement and the subsequent statements, and argues that the close to two-week time frame was insufficient to dissipate the effects of the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 illegality}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 of the first statement, we hold that the statements made by Santos after September 4, 1999 were not rendered inadmissible as the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 fruits of the poisonous tree.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 D.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Change of Venue and Trial Judge}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Comment before Jury Sequestration}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [66]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The last issues we address pertain to the publicity that this case received and Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for a change of venue and the trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s comment to the jury explaining why they were being sequestered.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Change of Venue}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [67]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a change of venue.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
 We raise, but decline to discuss two underlying issues in a change of venue case.  First, there is the pragmatic consideration of determining the location of the alternative venue.  Second
, the court must determine what statutory or legal basis exists on Guam, which confers upon the trial court the ability to order a change of venue.  In light of the issues import, both parties should have properly addressed and briefed them.}{
\insrsid9779984  }}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We review a trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s denial of a motion to change venue for an abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Harris v. Pulley}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 885 F.2d 1354, 1360 (9th Cir. 1988); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
see State v. Barrera}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 22 P.3d 1177, 1181 (N.M. 2001); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Jensen v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 781 So. 2d 468, 469 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001).}{
\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
 We take note that neither party has set forth the proper standard of review for the change of venue issue.}{\insrsid9779984   }}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [T]he trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s decision will not be disturbed if abuse cannot be demonstrated.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Jensen}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 781 So.2d at 469.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Stewart v. State, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 562 So. 2d 1365, 1369 (Ala. Crim. App. 1989).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In analyzing the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s decision, the focus is }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 whether the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s venue determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Substantial evidence consists of relevant evidence that might be accepted by a reasonable mind as adequate to support a conclusion.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Barrera}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 22 P.3d at 1181 (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [68]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab The policy behind a change of venue is }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to deny . . . probable prejudice}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  from pre-trial publicity and }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 to ensure that a defendant will be convicted upon the evidence properly admitted in court.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Cunningham}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 620 P.2d 535, 539 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980) (Roe, J. concurring) (citations omitted); }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 see also Sheppard v. Maxwell}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 384 U.S. 333, 351, 86 S. Ct. 1507, 1516 (1966).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The standards governing a change of venue ultimately derive from the due process c
lause of the fourteenth amendment which safeguards a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s sixth amendment right to be tried by a panel of impartial, indifferent jurors.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Harris}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 885 F.2d at 1361 (internal quotations and citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 If a trial court is }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 unable to seat an impartial jury because of prejudicial pretrial publicity or an inflamed community atmosphere,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  then a defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s motion for a change of venue should be granted.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In determining whether pre-trial publicity was so prejudicial as to warrant a change of venue, we adopt the following two-step analytical framework:}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 1. [D]id publicity pervade the court proceedings to the extent that prejudice can be presumed?; if not, then
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2. [D]id defendant show actual prejudice among members of the jury?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Stokley, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 898 P.2d 454, 462 (Ariz. 1995).}{\i\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, we embrace the Ninth Circuit}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s definition of presumed prejudice and actual prejudice as set forth in }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Harris v. Pulley}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 885 F.2d 1354 (9th Cir. 1988).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Presumed prejudice arises }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 when the record demonstrates that the community where the trial was held was saturated with prejudicial and inflammatory media publicity about the crime.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Harris}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 885 F.2d at 1361.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Actua
l prejudice exists if the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 jurors demonstrated actual partiality of hostility that cannot be laid aside.
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . at 1363.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [69]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the instant appeal, Santos argues that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his pre-trial motion for a change of venue.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Santos contends that the pre-trial publicity rose to the level of both presumed and actual prejudice.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Applying the two-step analytical framework set forth 
above, we find no existence of either presumed or actual prejudice, and therefore, hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for a change of venue.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Presumed Prejudice}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [70]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We begin our analysis by determining whether the pre-trial publicity was inherently prejudicial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In our review of the record, we are unconvinced that prejudice from the publicity can be presumed.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab B.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Courts are hesitant in finding presumed prejudice because saturation occurs only in extreme circumstances.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See Harris}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 885 F.2d at 1361.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Moreover, the defendant has the burden to show }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
pretrial publicity so outrageous that it promises to turn the trial into a mockery of justice or a mere formality.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Stokley, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 898 P.2d at 462 (quoting }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Bible}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 858 P.2d 1152, 1166 (Ariz. 1993)).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, Santos submits forty-one articles dated from September 5, 1999 to January 19, 2000.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Appellant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab B.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The articles, however, do not demonstrate extreme saturation from the media.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Although Hermie}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s disappearance generated extensive publicity in the beginning, a few months after the incident, the publicity waned.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Several of the articles were simple one paragraph synopsis of the case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab B, Exhibits 27-30, 33.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The news articles were mostly factual in nature and focused on the investigation conducted by police.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 It is insufficient that
 Santos establishes to this court that the case received media coverage, which informed potential jurors of the case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Rather, Santos has to demonstrate how the publicity }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 resulted in a trial that was }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 utterly corrupted.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Stokley, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 898 P.2d at 463 (quoting }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Murphy v. Florida, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 421 U.S. 794, 798, 95 S. Ct. 2031, 2035 (1975)).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We agree with the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s observation that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [h]igh publicity cases do not necessarily mean that a court of competent jurisdiction is unable to select a fair and impartia
l jury . . . [t]his is evident in the high profile cases of John Delorean, Rodney King, O.J. Simpson, and Guam}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Beau Bruneman child homicide case.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Excerpts of Record, tab E, p. 5.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [71]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Additionally, we are unpersuaded by Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  analogy of the facts of this case to cases he cites where the court overturned the defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s conviction as a result of presumed prejudice because we find those cases distinguishable.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 For example, Santos cites to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Rideau v. Louisiana}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 373 U.S. 723, 83 S. Ct. 1417 (1963), where the court held that it was }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 a denial of due process of law to refuse the request for a change of venue . . . .}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Rideau}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 373 U.S. at 726, 83 S. Ct. at 1419.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In that case, however, the court hel
d that the community }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
had been exposed repeatedly and in depth to the spectacle of [the defendant] personally confessing in detail to the crimes with which he was later to be charged}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  on television at least three times.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
More importantly, three of the jurors who convicted the defendant admitted having seen the televised confession.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . at 725, 83 S. Ct. at 1418.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In contrast to the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Rideau}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  case, this case is more analogous to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Fetterly v. Paskett}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 163 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 1998), where the court found no presumed prejudice despite extensive publicity because the publicity occurred months before trial and focused on the facts.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Fetterly}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 163 F.3d at 1146.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Therefore, we do not find the existence of presumed prejudice.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi2160\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 b.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Actual Prejudice}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [72]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Because we are unable to find presumed prejudice as a result of the pre-trial publicity, we must then determine whether there was actual prejudice.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
The relevant inquiry for actual prejudice is the effect of the publicity on the objectivity of the jurors, not the fact of the publicity itself.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Stokley, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 898 P.2d at 463 (citing }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Bible}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 858 P.2d at 1169).}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Therefore, in order for us to find actual prejudice, Santos must go beyond the forty-one articles that he provides to this court, and demonstrate that the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 jurors had }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
formed preconceived notions concerning the defendant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s guilt and that they [could not] lay those notions aside.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id. }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 (alteration in original) (quoting }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 State v. Chaney}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 686 P.2d 1265, 1272 (Ariz. 1984)); s}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ee also}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Dobbert v. Florida}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 432 U.S. 282, 303, 97 S. Ct. 2290, 2303 (1977).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 A key factor in ascertaining }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 jurors}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  assurances of impartiality}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  is the percentage of veniremen who }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 will admit to a disqualifying prejudice.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Murphy, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 421 U.S. at 803, 95 S. Ct. at 2037.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Here, Santos has not presented any facts regarding the jurors}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  partiality displayed during voire dire or how his conviction was a result of that partiality.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Consequently, we are unable to find, in the conditions presented in this case, that actual prejudice existed.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In view of Santos}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  failure to demonstrate that t
he pre-trial publicity resulted in both presumed and actual prejudice, we hold that the trial court did not err when it denied Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for a change of venue.}{\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 2.}{\b\insrsid3683556  }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Trial Judge}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Comment before Jury Sequestration}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [73]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Lastly, Santos alleges that the trial court judge erred when he commented to the jury the reason why they were being sequestered.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9779984 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid9779984  We note that Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  brief is misleading with respect to this issue.  On page 46 of his brief, Santos couches the fourth argument as, }{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 The court erred in denying the defendant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}
{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s motion for change of venue and to sequester the jury.}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984   Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s Opening Brief, p. 46.  This last argument, which begins on page 53, does not pertain to the trial court}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s pre-trial denial of defendant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 
s motion to sequester the jury.  Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s Opening Brief, p. 53.  Instead, it pertains to the trial court}{
\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 s comment to the jury (after the court granted Santos}{\fs20\insrsid9779984 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid9779984  motion to sequester the jury before deliberation) about why they were being sequestered.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We review a trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s comment at trial for plain error.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 See United States v. Collins}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 78 F.3d 1021, 1033 (6th Cir. 2001).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
In evaluating the coercive effect that a trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement has on the jury, we }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 must consider the totality of circumstances surrounding the instruction and evaluate it in context.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 United States v. Markey}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 693 F.2d 594, 597 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982) (citing to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Jenkins v. United States}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 380 U.S. 445, 446, 85 S. Ct. 1059, 1060 (1965)).
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [74]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In the present case, Santos made a motion to sequester the jury before deliberation, which was granted.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In conjunction wit
h the granting of the motion, the trial judge explained to the jurors the three reasons why he was ordering the sequestration: (1) extensive publicity the case had been receiving, which included an internet poll of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 guilt or innocence; (2) an anonymous call that the court received regarding when the jurors were going to deliberate and where they were going to lunch; and, (3) the presence of both of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and the victim}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s family around the courthouse.}{\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [75]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Santos maintains that the trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement to the jury regarding why they were being sequestered }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
frightened}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  the jury and gave them the }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 heebee-jeebies.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 54.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Notwithstanding Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  admission that the trial court judge did }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 his best to minimize the effects of publicity,}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  Santos contends that the judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement tainted the verdict.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 53.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 We disagree.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [76]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In his brief, Santos cites to various cases where structural error resulted in a reversal of the verdict.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
While we wholly agree with the principle behind those cases that a defendant has a right to a fair trial, we find Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  reliance on them futile in the face of his failure to demonstrate how the trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statements prejudiced the jurors and therefore constituted a structural error.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In essence, Santos must provide a
 nexus between the statement and the effect it had on the jurors}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  deliberation and verdict.}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [77]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Countryman v. Winnebago County}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
, 481 N.E.2d 1255 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985), for example, the court affirmed the trial court}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s decision not to call a mistrial despite the jurors}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
 exposure to a newspaper article, wherein the Chief Justice of the court commented on the case.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Countryman}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 481 N.E.2d at 1260.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Countryman, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 the court reasoned that a defendant must }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 demonstrate}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  actual prejudice as a result of an occurrence of such magnitude and character that [he] was deprived of a fair trial.}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 . (citations omitted) (emphasis added).}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In order to accomplish this, the defendant must }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
show that one or more of the jurors was influenced or prejudiced to the extent that they were no longer fair and impartial.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3683556  }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Id}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Similarly, in the present case, Santos has failed to illustrate for this court how the trial judge}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement
 was so coercive it actually prejudiced the jurors so that they were no longer fair and impartial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The gist of Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  argument hypothesizes on the possibility of prejudice, but fails to point out in the record how a specific juror was actually tainted from the statement.
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [78]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab Moreover, as we denoted above, in analyzing whether or not the trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s comment to the jury resulted in actual prejudice, we must consider the totality of circumstances and take into consideration the context in which the statement was made.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Markey}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , 693 F.2d at 597 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Our review of the trial judge}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s statement reveals that the judge was mainly concerned with helping the jurors understand why they were being sequestered.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 The statement contains no bias.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 For example, the judge stated, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 None of the lawyers, the Court, doesn}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
t want to make it even harder for you.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 54.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Additionally, the judge displayed fairness when h
e stated that, }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 both . . . [Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 ] and [sic] victim}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s family were involved}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  and that }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 this case . . . it}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s important not only to the . . . [Santos] but also to the Government.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Appellant}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s Opening Brief, p. 54.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Accordingly, we find that the trial judge did not err in making such a statement in conjunction with the order to sequester.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 IV.}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\b\insrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [79]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab We hold that the trial court did not err in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for the appointment of an independent pathologist, in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for a change of venue, in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  moti
on to suppress the statements made between September 13, 1999 to September 14, 1999 based on }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 Miranda}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 , in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion to suppress Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  September 16, 1999 statement based on the }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 McNabb-Mallory}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  rule, and in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion to suppress all statements made after September 4, 1999 based on the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Additionally, we find that the trial court did not improperly curtail defense counsel}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
s cross-examination of Arnaiz, that the trial court did not err in failing to }{\i\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 sua sponte }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 provide an informer instruction, and that the 
trial court did not err in commenting to the jury about why they were being sequestered.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Moreover, although we find that the trial court erred when it found that Santos was not in custody during the September 3, 1999 to September 4, 1999 police encounter, we find that the error is harmless.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
Accordingly the trial court is }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 AFFIRMED}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 .}{\insrsid3683556 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO\tab \tab \tab \tab  PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR.
\par Associate Justice\tab \tab \tab \tab \tab  Chief Justice
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, J., concurring:}{\b\insrsid9779984 
\par }{\b\insrsid3683556\charrsid3683556 
\par }{\b\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 [80]}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 \tab I concur with the majority}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s affirmance of the trial court.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 I write, only to add, that I agree with the majority}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s holding that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying Santos}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556  motion for the appointment of a forensic pathologist and that an examination of the record demonstrates that Santos was not prejudiced as a result of the trial court}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 However, I find that the trial court}{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 s denial was approaching the level of an abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid3683556  }{
\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 In the future, in circumstantial-evidence driven cases, such as the present, I strongly recommend that the trial court be more disposed to providing the defendant with the forensic pathologist expert they r
equest, especially where identity of the remains was a crucial aspect of the trial.}{\insrsid3683556  }{\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 
At the very least, the trial court should have afforded defense counsel with an expert consultant in the area of forensic pathology.}{\insrsid3683556  
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3683556 {\insrsid9779984\charrsid3683556 FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD
\par }{\insrsid3683556 Associate Justice
\par }}