{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f39\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}
{\f40\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f42\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f43\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f44\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}
{\f45\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f46\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f47\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;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid6887914 Normal;}{
\s2\ql \li135\ri135\sb30\sa30\keepn\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel1\adjustright\rin135\lin135\itap0 \fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext0 \slink15 \styrsid6887914 heading 2;}{
\s3\ql \fi720\li0\ri135\sb30\sa30\keepn\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel2\adjustright\rin135\lin0\itap0 \fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext0 \slink16 \styrsid6887914 heading 3;}{\*\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 \fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
\sbasedon10 \slink2 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 Heading 2 Char;}{\*\cs16 \additive \fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink3 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 Heading 3 Char;}{
\s17\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 \slink18 \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 footnote text;}{\*\cs18 \additive 
\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink17 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 Footnote Text Char;}{\*\cs19 \additive \super \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 footnote reference;}{\*\cs20 \additive 
\sbasedon10 \styrsid6887914 page number;}{\s21\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext21 \slink22 \styrsid6887914 footer;}{\*
\cs22 \additive \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink21 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 Footer Char;}{\s23\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext23 \slink24 \styrsid6887914 header;}{\*\cs24 \additive \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon10 \slink23 \slocked \ssemihidden \styrsid6887914 Header Char;}}
{\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\listtable{\list\listtemplateid938656416\listhybrid{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat2\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid1205919866
\'02\'00.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fbias0 \fi-360\li1080\jclisttab\tx1080\lin1080 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}
\fi-360\li1800\jclisttab\tx1800\lin1800 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li2520\jclisttab\tx2520\lin2520 }
{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698703\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li3240\jclisttab\tx3240\lin3240 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0
\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li3960\jclisttab\tx3960\lin3960 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1
\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li4680\jclisttab\tx4680\lin4680 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext
\leveltemplateid67698703\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5400\jclisttab\tx5400\lin5400 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713
\'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li6120\jclisttab\tx6120\lin6120 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'08.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li6840
\jclisttab\tx6840\lin6840 }{\listname ;}\listid1519197446}}{\*\listoverridetable{\listoverride\listid1519197446\listoverridecount0\ls1}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid811014\rsid862776\rsid1598413\rsid1972231\rsid2193419\rsid2309175\rsid2371452\rsid2504626\rsid2506087
\rsid3176464\rsid3422714\rsid3810279\rsid3822112\rsid3831056\rsid4160285\rsid4329331\rsid4331392\rsid4744076\rsid4815830\rsid4855016\rsid4931203\rsid5052173\rsid5062183\rsid5123780\rsid5592493\rsid5643559\rsid6060947\rsid6160848\rsid6514138\rsid6782860
\rsid6887914\rsid6953338\rsid7366506\rsid7483118\rsid7958375\rsid8016262\rsid8083724\rsid8270074\rsid8524331\rsid8598875\rsid8790013\rsid8866877\rsid9189166\rsid9452663\rsid9455426\rsid9776131\rsid10712439\rsid10749241\rsid11014019\rsid11292607
\rsid11355540\rsid11404427\rsid11880640\rsid11928628\rsid12063525\rsid12081942\rsid12211158\rsid12921552\rsid12931985\rsid12983114\rsid13198352\rsid14055906\rsid14105686\rsid14108652\rsid14496123\rsid14510136\rsid14695321\rsid14967201\rsid15032169
\rsid15159555\rsid15297671\rsid15405516\rsid15541791\rsid15547431\rsid15560408\rsid15864576\rsid15945946\rsid16592213\rsid16597937\rsid16671932}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info
{\title \'93this is a quote, has said, of me saying \'91this is a quote\'92\'94}{\author ruddley_e}{\operator ruddley_e}{\creatim\yr2011\mo8\dy1\hr8\min58}{\revtim\yr2011\mo8\dy1\hr9\min12}{\version1}{\edmins12}{\nofpages14}{\nofwords5815}{\nofchars33146}
{\*\company scims}{\nofcharsws38884}{\vern24689}}\margl1440\margr1440\margb1008 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1440\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1
\dgvshow1\jexpand\viewkind4\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct
\asianbrkrule\rsidroot6887914\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit\viewbksp1 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid6887914 \chftnsep 

\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid6887914 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid6887914 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid6887914 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \psz1\linex0\headery1440\endnhere\titlepg\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid6445250\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \s23\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqr\tx9360\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2628883 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid1578167 People v. Kitano}{\fs20\insrsid1578167 , Opinion \tab Page}{\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528  }{\field{\*\fldinst {\cs20\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528  PAGE }
}{\fldrslt {\cs20\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid15547431 14}}}{\cs20\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528  of }{\field{\*\fldinst {\cs20\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528  NUMPAGES }}{\fldrslt {
\cs20\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid6887914 22}}}{\cs20\fs20\insrsid1578167 
\par }\pard \s23\ql \li0\ri0\sl-120\slmult0\widctlpar\brdrb\brdrs\brdrw10\brsp20 \tqr\tx9360\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2628883 {\cs20\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528 
\par }\pard \s23\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2628883 {\fs20\insrsid1578167\charrsid15736528 \tab }{\insrsid1578167 
\par }}{\footer \pard\plain \s21\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\pvpara\phmrg\posxc\posy0\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8660356 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs20\insrsid1578167 
\par }\pard \s21\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid1578167 
\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 \s3\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel2\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 
\fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\ulnone\cf0\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 PEOPLE OF GUAM,
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Plaintiff-Appellee,
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 v.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 ARNOLD BLANCO KITANO,
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Defendant-Appellant.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard\plain \s2\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\outlinelevel1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\ul\cf1\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\b\ulnone\cf0\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 OPINION
\par }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Filed:}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 July 29, 2011
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Cite as: 2011 Guam 11}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 

\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Supreme Court Case No.:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 CRA09-011
\par Superior Court Case No.:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 CF0499-08
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
\par Argued and submitted on September 10, 2010
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid7210173 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard 
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\pararsid6887914 {\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appearing for Defendant-Appellant:}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard\plain \s23\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Ladd A. Baumann, }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Esq.
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Baumann, Kondas and Xu, LLC 
\par DNA Bldg., Ste. 903
\par 238 Archbishop Flores St.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96910\cell }\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellee:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Marianne Woloschuk, }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Esq.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Assistant Attorney General
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Office of the Attorney General
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 287 W. O\rquote Brien Dr.
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Hag\'e5t\'f1a, GU 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trftsWidthB3\trftsWidthA3\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid7210173 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl 
\clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard 
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 BEFORE: ROBERT J. TORRES, Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; KATHERINE A. MARAMAN, Associate Justice.}{
\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914 
 On January 18, 2011, Justice F. Philip Carbullido was sworn in as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Guam.  The signatures in this opinion reflect the titles of the justices at the time this matter was considered and determined.}}}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 MARAMAN, J.:}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par [1]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Defendant-Appellant Arnold Blanco Kitano appeals from a final judgment convicting him of one count of First Degree
 Criminal Sexual Conduct and one count of Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (both First Degree Felonies).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano argues that the judgment should be vacated and the case remanded for a new trial because the trial court erred in rulings related to the government\rquote s untimely disclosure of possible exculpatory material and failure to p
reserve certain evidence, and because the trial court denied him the right to testify in his own defense.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [2]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 For the reasons set forth below, we affirm Kitano\rquote 
s convictions.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 I.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par [3]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano was indicted by the grand jury for one count of First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a 1st Degree Felony) (\'93
First Degree CSC\'94) and one count of Second Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct (As a 1st Degree Felony) (\'93Second Degree CSC\'94).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [4]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The charges against Kitano stemmed from an alleged attack on C.L.}{
\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914  Pursuant to Guam Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 3(d)(3)(B), we shall refer to the victim by initials only.  }{\i\insrsid6887914 See}{
\insrsid6887914  Guam R. App. P. 3(d)(3)(B) (\'93All motions, briefs, opinions, and orders of the court shall refer to . . . a victim of a sex crime . . . by initials only.\'94).}}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 during the early morning hours of October 13, 2008.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
C.L. was at her place of business, a massage parlor in Tumon, on the night of the attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
A male individual entered the premises and asked for permission to use the restroom.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Soon after, he cornered C.L. and forced her to engage in certain sexual acts.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
C.L. was eventually able to escape from her attacker and flag down a passing motorist for help.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In the meantime, C.L.\rquote 
s attacker fled the scene.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [5]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Guam Police Depar
tment Officer Peter Tydingco was the first to arrive on the scene.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Transcripts, (\'93Tr.\'94
), vol. 2 at 14 (Cont. Jury Trial, Jan. 16, 2009).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.L. gave Officer 
Tydingco a description of the attacker that initially was vague as to age, height, and weight.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.L. eventually composed herself and provided 
Officer Tydingco a better description.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.L. described her attacker as being between late-30s and early 40s, weari
ng brown shorts and a t-shirt, having shoulder-length hair and a mustache, being possibly local, and having numerous tattoos on his arms and chest.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.L. specifically described one tattoo on the assailant\rquote s chest that she was able to view when he removed his shirt during the attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }
{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The tattoo was described as being on the center of his chest and depicting a female with long hair combed to the right.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [6]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Officer Donny Tainatongo later arrived on the scene to take photographs.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Officer Tainatongo\rquote s field 
notes relating to the incident contained a brief description of the assailant.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano contends that this description was based on information relayed over the police radio by Officer Tydingco.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes described the suspect as male, possibly Guamanian, in his 30s-40s, height and weight unknown, with a mustache and numerous tattoos.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [7]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
On the evening of October 25, 2008, the police asked C.L. to come to the Tumon precinct for a follow-up interview.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
There, C.L. provided a more detailed description of her attacker, including his complexion, the color of his hair, and his build.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
C.L. also re-described the assailant\rquote s chest tattoo, as well as drew a picture of the tattoo on the precinct whiteboard.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano was unaware of this drawing until the information was revealed at trial during the cross-examination of Officer Paul Tapao.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano learned during the same line of questioning that the drawing had been erased without it first being photographed or in some other way preserved.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [8]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 At approximately the same time as C.L.\rquote 
s interview, the police apprehended Kitano and brought him to the Tumon precinct for questioning.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
The police asked Kitano to remove his shirt so that they could view his tattoos.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 After determining that a tattoo on Kitano\rquote 
s chest matched the description of the tattoo on C.L.\rquote s alleged attacker, the police arrested Kitano for the October 13 attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 

\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [9]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Prior to trial, Kitano moved to exclude evidence of prior bad acts, as well as photo line-up identification and any in-court identification of Kitano by C.L. on the grounds of suggestive identification.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano claimed that C.L. was allowed to view him on the Tumon precinct\rquote s closed-circuit television monitors while he was being questioned on October 25.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The trial court granted Kitano\rquote s motion to exclude evidence of prior bad acts, but denied Kitano\rquote 
s motion to suppress suggestive identification, finding that there was no evidence of a suggestive identification.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [10]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 On November 25, 2008, Kitano made an 8 GCA \'a7\'a7 70.10 an
d 70.15 motion to compel discovery, requesting production by the government of discoverable material, including any }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Laxamana}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  field notes from the police as well as any }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 exculpatory evidence.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 On January 6, 2009, three weeks after the discovery motion 
and nine days before opening statements, Plaintiff-Appellee People of Guam (\'93the People\'94
) filed a Supplemental Witness List and turned over parts of a report prepared by Officer Tainatongo, including several photographs taken the night of the alleged attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The following day, Kitano moved to dismiss the case or, in the alternative, to exclude these materials, including Officer Tainatongo\rquote s testimony, citing to the delayed disclosure.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 After a hearing on the motion, the trial court granted Kitano\rquote s motion 
to exclude the evidence, finding that the delayed disclosure caused prejudice to Kitano, but that the delay was not so serious as to warrant dismissal.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [11]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
During trial, however, Kitano asked the court to allow the limited testimony of Officer Tainatongo.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano wanted to question Officer
 Tainatongo about the description of the assailant he received on the night of the attack, but did not want Officer Tainatongo to be able to testify about Kitano\rquote s prior bad acts, which had been previously excluded at Kitano\rquote s request.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The trial court denied Kitano\rquote s motion, ruling that if it allowed Officer 
Tainatongo to testify, then his entire police report and photographs would be admissible.}{\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914 
 Kitano informed the trial court that if it decided to allow Officer Tainatongo to testify fully, Kitano would withdraw his motion to admit Officer Tainatongo\rquote s limited testimony.  }}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [12]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
At trial, the issue was raised of whether Kitano would testify in his own defense.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano chose not to testify.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [13]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The jury returned a verdict of guilty as to all charges.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as to the First Degree CSC
 charge, and to fifteen (15) years imprisonment as to the Second Degree CSC charge, both sentences to run concurrently.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [14]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Judgment was entered and Kitano timely filed his Se
cond Amended Notice of Appeal.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 II.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 JURISDICTION
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par [15]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 This court has jurisdiction over appeals from final judgments pursuant to {\*\bkmkstart OLE_LINK1}48 U.S.C.A. \'a7 1424-1(a)(2) 
{\*\bkmkend OLE_LINK1}(Westlaw current through Pub. L. 112-23 (2011)); 7 GCA \'a7\'a7 3105, 3107(b), and 3108(a) (2005); and 8 GCA \'a7\'a7 130.10 and 130.15(a) (2005).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 III.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 STANDARD OF REVIEW
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [16]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We review the trial court\rquote 
s evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 People v. Fisher}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 2001 Guam 2 \'b6 7 (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 J.J. Moving Serv., Inc. v. Sanko Bussan (GUAM) Co.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 1998 Guam 19 \'b6 31).}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93Alleged }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violations are reviewed }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 de novo}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .\'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  \'b6 12 (quoting }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Alvarez}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 86 F.3d 901, 903 (9th Cir. 1996)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Whether a }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violatio
n warrants a new trial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 People v. Flores}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2009 Guam 22 \'b6 59 (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 State v. Wilson}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 200 P.3d 1283, 1292 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008)).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [17]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We review matters concerning the Confrontation Clause }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 de novo}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
People v. Salas}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2000 Guam 2 \'b6 11 (citing }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. George}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 960 F.2d 97, 99 (9th Cir. 1992)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Whether the trial court infringed on the defendant\rquote s constitutional right to testify is a mixed question of law and fact reviewed }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 de novo}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 See United States v. Stark}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 507 F.3d 512, 515 (7th Cir. 2007) (\'93We review }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 de novo}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 the question whether an evidentiary ruling infringed upon a defendant\rquote s constitutional right to testify.\'94 (citations omitted)); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Gordon}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 290 F.3d 539, 546 (3d Cir. 2002) (\'93We review de novo \lquote claims of constitutional violations, such as the denial of the right to testify.\rquote \'94 (quoting }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Leggett}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 162 F.3d 237, 245 (3d Cir. 1998))).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 IV.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 ANALYSIS
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 A.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Alleged }{
\b\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  Violations}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [18]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano argues that the People\rquote s delay in disclosing Officer
 Tainatongo\rquote s field notes as well as its failure to preserve C.L.\rquote s drawing of her assailant\rquote s tattoo violated his due process rights under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady v. Maryland}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 373 U.S. 83 (1963).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [19]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , the Supreme Court held that \'93the suppression by the pr
osecution of evidence favorable to the accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment . . . .\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 373 U.S. at 87.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 A similar requirement is found under Guam\rquote s discovery statute, which requires the prosecuting attorney to disclose \'93
any material or information which tends to negate the guilt of the defendant as to the offense charged . . . .\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 8 GCA \'a7
 70.10(a)(7) (2005).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [20]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93\lquote [E]
vidence is material only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 A \'93reasonable probability\'94 is probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.\rquote \'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Fisher}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2001 Guam 2 \'b6 13 (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
United States v. Presser}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 844 F.2d 1275, 1281 (6th Cir. 1988)).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [21]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 There are three components of a }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violation.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Flores}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2009 Guam 22 \'b6 61; }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Strickler v. Greene}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 527 U.S. 263, 281-82 (1999).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93
First, the evidence at issue must be favorable to the accused,\'94 either because it is exculpatory or because it is impeaching.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Flores}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2009 Guam 22 \'b6 61 (citing }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Bagley}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 473 U.S. 667, 676 (1985)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93Second, the evidence must have been suppressed by the government, either willfully or inadvertently.\'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  (citing }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Agurs}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 427 U.S. 97, 110 (1976)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Third, prejudice must have ensued, i.e., the defendant must have been deprived a fair trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  (citing }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Bagley}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 473 U.S. at 676-78).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93[S]trictly speaking, there is never a real \lquote 
}{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violation\rquote 
 unless the nondisclosure was so serious that there is a reasonable probability that the suppressed evidence would have produced a different verdict.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Strickler}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 527 U.S. at 281.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 This is because }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \rquote s \'93\lquote 
overriding concern [is] with the justice of the finding of guilt,\rquote  not with the accused\rquote s ability to prepare for trial.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Norris v. Schotten}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 146 F.3d 314, 334 (6th Cir. 1998) (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Agurs}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 427 U.S. at 113 & n.20).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [22]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Generally, the principles announced in }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  do not apply to a tardy disclosure of exculpatory evidence, but rather to a complete failure to disclose.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Word}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 806 F.2d 658, 665 (6th Cir. 1986) (citing }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Holloway}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 740 F.2d 1373, 1381 (6th Cir. 1984), }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 cert. denied}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 469 U.S. 1021 (1984)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 If previously undisclosed evidence was eventually disclosed during trial, a }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violation did not occur unless the defendant was prejudiced by the delay.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Flores}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 2009 Guam 22 \'b6 62 (citing }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Word}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 806 F.2d at 665); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also Madsen v. Dormire}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 137 F.3d 602, 605 (8th Cir. 1998) (\'93This is so because \lquote [t]
here is no general constitutional right to discovery in a criminal case, and }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  did not create one.\rquote \'94
 (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Weatherford v. Bursey}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 429 U.S. 545, 559 (1977))).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The appropriate consideration in that situation is whether the disclosure came so late as to prevent the defendant from receiving a fair trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
 }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  (citing }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Bagley}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 473 U.S. at 674-78).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 If a defendant received \'93exculpatory evidence 
\lquote in time to make effective use of it,\rquote  a new trial is, in most cases, not warranted.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  (quoting }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Paxson}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 861 F.2d 730, 737 (D.C. Cir. 1988)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 1.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Delayed disclosure of Officer Tainatongo\rquote s field notes}{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [23]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano argues that the People\rquote s delayed disclosure of Officer
 Tainatongo\rquote s field notes violated Kitano\rquote s rights under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano contends that the notes contained C.L.\rquote s initial description of her alleged attacker to Officer
 Tydingco, who then relayed the information to Officer Tainatongo via police radio.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano essentially argue
s that the notes were material because they did not mention any prominent tattoos on the assailant\rquote s chest, which demonstrates discrepancies in C.L.\rquote s descriptions and could have been used to impeach the testimony of C.L. and Officer
 Tydingco.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Thus, had t
he information been timely disclosed to the defense, the result of the trial would have been different because Kitano would have been able to prepare a more aggressive argument against C.L.\rquote 
s ability to accurately identify her attacker, which would have created greater reasonable doubt of Kitano\rquote s guilt.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [24]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In response, the People argue that Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes are not }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  material because they do not contain any exculpatory or
 impeachment information; rather, the field notes are consistent with the description given to Officer Tydingco by C.L. and transmitted over the police radio, the only difference being that the description in Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes is less complete.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The People contend that \'93
[t]his makes sense, given that Officer Tydingco had the role of first responder on the day of the attack and had direct contact with the victim, while Officer Tainatongo arrived later to take photographs.\'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appellee\rquote s Br. at 12 (Aug. 13, 2010).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [25]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Furthermore, the People assert, even if Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes contained exculpatory evidence, it could not be characterized as material because had the trial court permitted Kitano to present the evidence to the jury, \'93th
ere is no likelihood that this would have had any effect on the guilty verdicts, because Officer Tainatongo\rquote s information is a wholly contained subset of Officer Tydingco\rquote s information, rather than a different set of data altogether.\'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  at 12-13.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [26]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We agree with the People.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Ultimately, Kitano\rquote s }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  argument fails because the information contained in Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes is not material as there is not a reasonable probability that had the evidence been disclosed sooner \endash  or been introduced at trial \endash  it would have produced a different verdict.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }
{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Both C.L. and Officer Tydingco testified at length as to C.L.\rquote s description of the assailant on the night of the alleged attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Even if Kitano had been able to offer Officer Tainatongo\rquote s testimony regarding the description he received over the police radio in order to suggest to the jury that C.L.\rquote 
s initial description of her alleged attacker was inconsistent with her later descriptions, it is unlikely that this would have swayed the jury into finding Kitano not guilty of the attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The description of the suspect contained in Officer Tainatongo\rquote s notes, though lacking in detail, is not inconsistent with the description C.L. purportedly gave Officer 
Tydingco on the night of the attack.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [27]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Moreover, assuming }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 arguendo}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 that the field notes contained exculpatory or impeachment evidence, the fact that Kitano did not move for a continuance in order to be afforded an opportunity to better assess the new evidence hurts any argument that he suffered prejudice by the delay.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Because there is not a reasonable probability that a more timely disclosure of Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s field notes would have turned the case in Kitano\rquote s favor, the delay did not amount to a }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  violation.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par {\listtext\pard\plain\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \hich\af0\dbch\af0\loch\f0 2.\tab}}\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\ls1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Failure to preserve C.L.\rquote s drawing of assailant\rquote s tattoo
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [28]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano argues that the government violated his right to due process by failing to preserve C.L.\rquote s drawing of her alleged attacker\rquote s chest tattoo on the precinct\rquote s whiteboard.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [29]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Under the federal constitution, the government\rquote 
s failure to provide evidence within its control to a criminal defendant may violate the defendant\rquote s right to due process of law in two situations.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [30]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The first situation concerns a violation of the defendant\rquote s }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  rights through the withholding of exculpatory evidence.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In that situation, the Supreme Court has held that when the government suppresses or fails to disclose material exculpatory evidence, the good or bad faith of the prosecution is irrelevant.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 See Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 373 U.S. at 87 (\'93
We now hold that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violate{\*\bkmkstart sp_708_1197}{\*\bkmkstart SDU_1197}{\*\bkmkend sp_708_1197}{\*\bkmkend SDU_1197}s 
{\*\bkmkstart citeas__Cite_as__373_U_S__83___87__83_S_}{\*\bkmkend citeas__Cite_as__373_U_S__83___87__83_S_}due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .\'94 (emphasis added)).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [31]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
The second situation concerns the failure of the police to preserve evidence that }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 might}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  be useful to the accused.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In that situation, by contrast, the Court recognized that the Due Process Clause \'93
requires a different result when we deal with the failure of the State to preserve evidentiary material of which no more can be said than that it . . . }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 might}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  have exonerated the defendant.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Arizona v. Youngblood}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 488 U.S. 51, 57 (1988) (emphasis added).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The Court held that \'93
unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law.\'94}{\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914 
 The Court explained that part of the reason for the difference in treatment is that \'93
[w]henever potentially exculpatory evidence is permanently lost, courts face the treacherous task of divining import of materials whose contents are unknown and, very often, disputed.\'94  }{\i\insrsid6887914 Youngblood}{\insrsid6887914 
, 488 U.S. at 57-58 (quoting }{\i\insrsid6887914 California v. Trombetta}{\insrsid6887914 , 467 U.S. 479, 486 (1984)).  Another part stems from the Court\rquote s unwillingness to read the \'93fundamental fairness\'94
 requirement of the Due Process Clause \'93as imposing on the police an undifferentiated and absolute duty to retain and to preserve all material that might be of conceivable evidentiary significance in a particular prosecution.\'94  }{\i\insrsid6887914 
Id.}{\insrsid6887914  at 58.  The Court believed that
\par }\pard \s17\qj \li720\ri720\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\insrsid6887914 requiring a defendant to show bad faith on the part of the police both limits the extent of the police\rquote 
s obligation to preserve evidence to reasonable bounds and confines it to that class of cases where the interests of justice most clearly require it, }{\i\insrsid6887914 i.e.}{\insrsid6887914 
, those cases in which the police themselves by their conduct indicate that the evidence could form a basis for exonerating the defendant.
\par }\pard \s17\qj \li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\pnrdate653773775\pnrnot1\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\i\insrsid6887914 Id.}}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  at 58.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Although the Court did not precisely define \'93bad faith,\'94 it did hold that the \'93presence or absence of bad faith by the police for purposes of the Due Process Clause must necessarily turn on the police\rquote 
s knowledge of the exculpatory value of the evidence at the time it was lost or destroyed.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  at 56 n. *.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [32]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We find C.L.\rquote s drawing to be the sort of \'93
potentially useful evidence\'94 referred to in }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Youngblood}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , not the material exculpatory evidence addressed in }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
At best, C.L.\rquote s drawing was so different from Kitano\rquote s actual tattoo that had the jury been able to see the drawing, it would have found C.L. and Officer Tydingco\rquote s testimonies to completely lack credibility.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [33]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The People assert that the failure to preserve C.L.\rquote 
s drawing did not violate Kitano\rquote s right to due process under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Youngblood}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  because Kitano has not shown
 that the police erased the drawing in bad faith.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We agree.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano has not even alleged that the police acted in bad faith when they erased the drawing before preserving it in some way.}{
\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914  It appears that the underlying issue in this case is one that has not been formally raised on appeal: that is, Kitano\rquote 
s belief that the police used suggestive techniques in order to influence C.L. to identify Kitano as her attacker.  Kitano argues that the drawing of the tattoo should have been preserved because \'93
[i]f Officer Tapao drew the picture in response to [C.L.]\rquote s description, the drawing would create doubt as to whether the police coached C.L.\rquote s identification of the Defendant since the police were able to examine the Defendant\rquote 
s tattoos at the precinct and possibly use his distinct tattoos to influence [C.L].\'94  Appellant\rquote s Br. at 13 (July 13, 2010).  Thus, Kitano does not allege that the police acted in bad faith in erasing C.L.\rquote 
s drawing, but instead alleges that the drawing might not even have been C.L.\rquote s in the first place.  In light of the trial court\rquote s finding that there was no evidence of suggestive identification, as well as Kitano\rquote 
s failure to appeal that decision, it is beyond the scope of this appeal to consider Kitano\rquote s suggestive identification argument.}}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Indeed, at oral argument, counsel for Kitano conceded that the trial record is consistent with the government\rquote s position that there was no bad faith on the part of the police in erasing the drawing.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Digital Recording at 2:07:36 (Oral Argument, Sept. 10, 2010).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano has failed to establish a due process violation under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Youngblood}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }
{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Thus, there was no error.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 B.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Alleged Violation of Kitano\rquote s Right to Confrontation
\par 
\par [34]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano contends that the trial court infringed upon his constitutional right to confrontation under }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Crawford v. Washington}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 541 U.S. 36 (2004), when it ruled that if Kitano elicited any testimony from Officer
 Tainatongo, all other evidence from Officer Tainatongo, including testimony regarding Kitano\rquote s prior bad acts that had been previously suppressed at Kitano\rquote s motion, would be admissible.}{
\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 
\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914  The trial court relied upon the \'93rule of completeness\'94 embodied in Guam Rules of Evidence Rule 106 to reach its decision.  Appellant
\rquote s Excerpts of Record (\'93ER\'94) at 60-62 (Dec. & Order, Jan. 21, 2009).  Rule 106 states that \'93[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that 
time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.\'94  Guam R. Evid. 106.}}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appellant\rquote s Br. at 15-17 (July 13, 2010). 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [35]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The Sixth Amendment\rquote s Confrontation Clause provides that, \'93
[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
U.S. Const. amend. VI.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [36]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano argues that the trial court\rquote 
s refusal to allow the limited testimony of Officer Tainatongo \'93cut off the testimony of Officer Tydingco, [C.L.], and effectively kept one investigator, Officer Tainatongo off the witness stand completely.\'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appellant\rquote s Br. at 16.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano contends that by threatening to allow the People to introduce Kitano\rquote s other bad acts if Kitano called upon Officer Tainatongo to testify at trial, the trial court \'93
prevented an effective opportunity to question C.L. about her perceptions at [the] time of the crime and the officer\rquote s recollections of her perceptions told to him at the crime scene.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Thus, Kitano contends, the trial court limited Kitano\rquote 
s confrontation of his accusers and denied the jury the opportunity to learn that C.L. was not consistent in her identification of Kitano.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  at 16-17.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [37]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The People assert that there was no violation of Kitano\rquote 
s right to confrontation under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Crawford}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We agree.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Crawford}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , the Supreme Court held that out-of-court testimonial 
statements by witnesses are barred under the Confrontation Clause, unless witnesses are unavailable and defendants had prior opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 541 U.S. 36, 54 (2004).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 This holding is inapposite to the instant case.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 This case does not involve a situation in which testimonial hearsay of an unavail
able witness was admitted without the defendant being afforded an opportunity of prior cross-examination of the witness.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Instead, the issue is whether the trial court\rquote s decision that all of Officer Tainatongo\rquote s evidence would be admissible should Kitano elicit testimony from Officer Tainatongo prevented Kitano from fully confronting C.L., Officer 
Tydingco, and Officer Tainatongo.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [38]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The Confrontation Clause \'93applies to \lquote witnesses\rquote 
 against the accused \endash  in other words, those who \lquote bear testimony.\rquote \'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  at 51.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Although Officer
 Tainatongo was listed as a government witness, he was not a witness against the accused because he did not testify against Kitano in court, and none of his out-of-court statements were offered at trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.L. and Officer Tydingco, on the other hand, }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 were}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 witnesses against the accused because they did testify against Kitano at trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Essentially, Kitano contends that had he been allowed to elicit the limited testimony of Officer Tainatongo, Officer Tainatongo }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 might}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  have testified that he did not hear over the police radio that the alleged assailant had a prominent chest tattoo.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Then this potential testimony would have been used to impeach C.L. and Officer Tydingco as to whether C.L. initially described her attacker as having a prominent chest tattoo.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano argues that by threatening to allow all of Officer Tainatongo\rquote 
s report to come in if he was called to the stand, the trial court essentially denied Kitano the right of effective cross-examination of C.L. and Officer Tydingco.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [39]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We disagree.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \'93[T]he Confrontation Clause guarantees only \lquote an }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 opportunity}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish.\rquote \'94}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Owens}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 484 U.S. 554, 559 (1988) (quoting }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kentucky v. Stincer}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 482 U.S. 730, 739 (1987)) (alterations in original).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 If Kitano\rquote s right to effective cross-examination was in any way hampered, it was through no fault of the trial court, but rather was a result of defense counsel\rquote 
s tactical decision to forego examining Officer Tainatongo for fear that other parts of his report might be admitted.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
We believe that notwithstanding the \'93rule of completeness\'94 embodied in Guam Rules of Evidence Rule 106, Kitano could have carefully tailored his examination of Officer
 Tainatongo in such a way that other parts of his report would not have been admitted.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Moreover, while cross-examination of C.L. and Officer 
Tydingco might not have been as extensive as Kitano wanted, we conclude that it comported with the Confrontation Clause\rquote s guarantee of an opportunity for effective cross-examination.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Accordingly, there was no error.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Alleged Violation of Kitano\rquote s Right to Testify
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [40]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Kitano contends that he was denied his constitutional right to testify in his own defense when the trial court \'93undertook to intimidate the Defendant and his defense counsel into waiving\'94 that right.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Appellant\rquote s Br. at 22.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 At issue is the following excha
nge between the court and defense counsel:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 are we ready, Mr. - -}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Could I just talk to him for one more time?}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Because I got a 
note that the court\rquote s apprise [sic] him of his rights (indiscernible).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 (Indiscernible) court?
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 \tab \tab \tab  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 How much more, [Counsel]?}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Just five minutes.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 All right.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Go ahead.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 And I\rquote m going to be citing 8 GCA 75.60.}{\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\fs20\super\insrsid6887914\charrsid551377 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914  }{
\fs20\insrsid6887914\charrsid13636117 Title 8 GCA \'a7 75.60 provides:}{\fs20\insrsid6887914  
\par }\pard\plain \s17\qj \fi720\li720\ri720\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid6887914\charrsid13636117 
A defendant in a criminal action or proceeding cannot be compelled to b
e a witness against himself but if he offers himself as a witness he may be cross-examined by the prosecuting attorney and the attorney for any codefendant as to all matters about which he was examined in chief.  His neglect or refusal to be a witness can
not in any manner prejudice him nor be used against him at the trial or proceeding by the prosecuting attorney.}{\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \s17\qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\insrsid6887914\charrsid13636117 8 GCA \'a7 75.60 (2005).}}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Warn him, and tell him that the doors could open once he testify [sic], and that would also include other prior acts.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 \tab  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 No, actually, I thought the court ruled already that his prior convictions - -}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Prior cases.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 If there\rquote s any.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 - - could not come in.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Well, no.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [PROSECUTOR]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We talked [about] the prior convictions, but not the 413 stuff.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 No, I (indiscernible) the court\rquote s ruling.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 I don\rquote t think the 
court ruled that that\rquote s admissi - - I thought the court ruled that was inadmissible?}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 That - -
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 You go find out what it is, [Counsel], because honestly - -}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Go find out, then you can come in here and tell me, because the jury has been waiting back there for an hour, sir.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Please.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2880\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 (Pause.)}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 \tab \tab \tab  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Do you have any sections that I could look at?}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [PROSECUTOR]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 That\rquote s what we\rquote re trying to figure out right now.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2880\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 (Pause.)}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin2880\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 (Off the record.)}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 THE COURT:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Welcome back in, ladies and gentlemen, to CF499-08, People versus Arnold Kitano.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 At this time, defense.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-2880\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin3600\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [DEFENSE COUNSEL]:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  \tab }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Your Honor, at this time we\rquote ll - - we don\rquote t have any additional witnesses, so we\rquote ll just rest our case.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par Tr., vol. 3 at 47-48 (Jury Trial \endash  Day 3, Mar. 31, 2010).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [41]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano asserts that the trial court\rquote s comments 
\par were a warning to the Defendant and his defense counsel that he should not testify in his own defense.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
The warning also prejudged an issue not before the court, that is if the Defendant testified and if the prosecution chose to offer impeachment evidence, that the court would admit it, regardless of any argument that defense counsel would make.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par Appellant\rquote s Br. at 18.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [42]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Generally, the defendant\rquote 
s right to testify is regarded both as a fundamental and a personal right that is waivable only by an accused.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 See, e.g.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Rock v. Arkansas}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 483 U.S. 44, 52 (1987); }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Jones v. Barnes}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 463 U.S. 745, 751 (1983); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brown v. Artuz}
{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 124 F.3d 73, 77 (2d Cir. 1997).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 However, while 
courts generally agree that a defendant\rquote s waiver of his right to testify must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, courts are split as to whether a trial court must advise a defendant of his right to testify and inquire into a defendant\rquote 
s waiver of that right.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Michele C. Kaminski, Annotation, }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Requirement 
that Court Advise Accused of, and Make Inquiry With Respect to, Waiver of Right to Testify}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 72 A.L.R.5th 403 \'a7 2[a] (1999).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [43]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
A majority of jurisdictions have taken the view that the trial judge has no duty to advise the defendant of his right to testify or to ascertain on the record whether the defendant\rquote s waiver of that right is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  \'a7\'a7 2[a], 11-19.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 These courts offer various rationales to support this view, including the notion that conducting such a colloquy is akin to the trial court participating in trial strategy.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  \'a7\'a7 11-12; }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also, e.g.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Joelson}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 7 F.3d 174, 178 (9th Cir. 1993) (\'93[J]udicial interference with this strategic decision poses a danger that \lquote the judge will appear
 to encourage the defendant to invoke or waive this right. . . .\rquote \'94); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Underwood v. Clark}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 939 F.2d 473, 476 (7th Cir. 1991) (noting that requiring judge to inquire of defendant directly whether he wants to testify places judge between the lawyer and his client and can produce confusion as well as delay); }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Siciliano v. Vose}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 834 F.2d 29, 30 (1st Cir. 1987) (reasoning that to require tria
l court to conduct a colloquy with defendant regarding right to testify could inappropriately influence defendant to waive his right }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 not}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  to testify); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Commonwealth v. Glacken}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 883 N.E.2d 1228, 1234 (Mass. 2008) (\'93Because of the delicate balance between a defendant\rquote 
s right to testify on his own behalf and his equally fundamental right not to testify . . . [s]uch a colloquy might give the defendant the impression that he was being urged by the judge to testify . . . .\'94 (alterations in original) (citation and i
nternal quotation marks omitted)); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 State v. Savage}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 577 A.2d 455, 473
 (N.J. 1990) (placing responsibility for informing defendant of right to testify on defense counsel rather than on trial court).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [44]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Moreover, many courts have held that, where a defenda
nt is represented by counsel, the trial court may presume, in the absence of the defendant\rquote 
s assertion of the right to testify, that the defendant, through defense counsel, has waived the right to testify, without conducting a colloquy with the defendant.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 72 A.L.R.5th 403 \'a7 15; }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also, e.g.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Edwards}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 897 F.2d 446, 446-47 (9th Cir. 1990).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [45]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Several courts following the majority approach have held that, though not necessary, an on-the-record inquiry is advisable in order to reduce any uncertainty surrounding a defendant\rquote s failure to testify and thus minimize litigation on the issue.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 72 A.L.R.5th 403 \'a7 10; }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also, e.g.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 State v. Gulbrandson}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 906 P.2d 579, 598 (Ariz. 1995) (recognizing that while trial court is generally not required to have defendant make an on-the-record waiver of right to testify, it may be prudent to do so); }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 State v. Walen}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 563 N.W.2d 742, 751-52 (Minn. 1997) (declining to use its supervisory powers to impose on trial court the duty to perform an on-the-record colloquy with every criminal defendant who does not testify, but recognizing the usefulness of such a colloquy); }
{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Phillips v. State}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 782 P.2d 381, 382
 (Nev. 1989) (stating that on-the-record colloquy with defendant regarding his right to testify, although not necessary for valid conviction, is good practice).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Other courts have held that such an inquiry may in fact be necessary under certain circumstances, such as where the court is aware of attorney-client conflicts or that the defendant is being prevented from exercising his right to testify.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 72 A.L.R.5th 403 \'a7\'a7 5-9; }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also, e.g.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 United States v. Pennycooke}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 65 F.3d 9, 12-13
 (3d Cir. 1995) (noting that colloquy may be required where attorney-client conflicts are evident); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Crawley v. Commonwealth}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 107 S.W.3d 197, 199 (Ky. 2003) (holding that trial court\rquote 
s failure to inquire as to whether defendant made a knowing and voluntary waiver of right to testify constituted error where trial court knew that defendant wanted to testify but was kept from the stand by defense counsel); }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 State v. Edwards}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 173 S.W.3d 384, 386
 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005) (finding that although trial court has no duty to inquire from a defendant who remains silent throughout proceedings regarding whether he will testify, it is error for trial court to be informed of defendant\rquote 
s desire to testify and not allow defendant to take the stand); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 cf. Hodge v. Haeberlin}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 579 F.3d 627, 639-40 (6th Cir. 2009) (finding that barring any statements or actions from defendant indicating disagreement with counsel on desire to testify, colloquy and on-the-record waiver not required).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [46]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
In a minority of jurisdictions, an affirmative duty on the part of the trial court to }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 advise a defendant of his right to testify}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  is imposed.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The few courts that have held that a trial court must }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 sua sponte}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  conduct a colloquy with a defendant regarding the right to testify \'93
often reason that the right to testify is so fundamental and personal that the procedural safeguards offered by this colloquy are necessary to ensure that 
the defendant understands the significance of the waiver of the right, particularly where the defendant is unrepresented.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 72 A.L.R.
5th 403 \'a7 2[a]; }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 see also, e.g.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 LaVigne v. State}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 812 P.2d 217, 222 (Alaska 1991) (stating that judges should make an on-the-record inquiry after close of defendant\rquote s case
 into whether non-testifying defendant understands and voluntarily waives right to testify); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 People v. Curtis}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
, 681 P.2d 504, 514-15 (Colo. 1984) (holding that whether there is proper waiver of right to testify should be clearly determined by trial court on the record); }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Tachibana v. State}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , 900 P.2d 1293, 1303 (Haw. 1995) (holding that trial court must advise criminal defendants of their right to testify and must obtain on-the-record waiver of that right in every case in whi
ch defendant does not testify).
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [47]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In the instant case, Kitano contends that under either the majority 
approach or the minority approach, the trial court violated his right to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [48]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano ar
gues that under the majority approach, the trial court was precluded from making any inquiry regarding Kitano\rquote s decision whether or not to testify, and the trial court\rquote 
s warning to defense counsel was akin to its giving advice to Kitano regarding whether or not he should testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
We do not agree that the majority rule is so broad as to preclude the trial court\rquote s actions in this case.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
The underlying issue in all of the aforementioned cases, including those cited by Kitano, was whether the trial court should be }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 required}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  to conduct a colloquy with regard to a defendant\rquote s right to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
The majority rule appears to be that the trial court has }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 no affirmative duty}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
 to conduct a colloquy or otherwise inquire into the defendant\rquote s decision; this is not the same as Kitano\rquote s contention that the majority rule prohibits the trial court from engaging in such an inquiry.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [49]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano also argues that under the minority or \'93advisement\'94
 rule, the trial court erred because it did not conduct a colloquy directly with Kitano regarding his right to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
It is unclear from the record whether Kitano was present in the courtroom during the discussion between the trial court and defense counsel regarding Kitano\rquote s decision whether or not to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In any event, we decline to follow the minority approach.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Instead, we strongly encourage the trial court to obtain through a neutral colloquy an on-the-record waiver from every criminal defendant who does not testify, but we hold that failure to conduct such a colloquy is not fatal error.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
A colloquy may be required in certain circumstances, such as where the defendant is unrepresented or where the trial court is aware that the defendant wishes to testify but is being kept from the stand by defense counsel.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Neither of those circumstances exists in this case.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [50]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Moreover, we disagree with Kitano that the trial court in this case prejudged the issue of the admissibility of any impeachment evidence that might have been offered by the government had Kitano testified.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  
}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The trial court merely instructed defense counsel, \'93Warn him, and tell him that the doors }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 could}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  open once he testify [sic], and that would also include other prior acts.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Tr., vol. 3 at 47 (Jury Trial \endash  Day 3) (emphasis added).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The tria
l court did not state with any certainty that such impeachment evidence }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 would}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  be admitted should Kitano testify.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Additionally, Kitano was afforded the opportunity to inform the trial court as to its prior decision regarding the admissibility of Kitano
\rquote s prior bad acts, but instead of doing so, Kitano chose to simply rest his case.}{\cs19\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\s17\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa120\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 \fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs19\super\insrsid6887914 \chftn }{\insrsid6887914  }{\cf1\insrsid6887914 
Ideally, the trial court\rquote s colloquy will be a simple inquiry into whether the defendant has been apprised of his right to testify and whether he knowingly and voluntarily waive
s that right.  Although the trial court in the instant case went beyond this simple inquiry, we do not find its actions to constitute reversible error. }}}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [51]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Accordingly, we find that the trial court\rquote 
s comments did not amount to a violation of Kitano\rquote s constitutional right to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 C.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Failure to Brief Issues Raised in Statement of Issues}{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par [52]}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Guam Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 7(b)(3) provides that unless the entire transcript is ordered, a
n appellant must within ten days of filing a notice of appeal file a statement of the issues that he intends to raise on appeal.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Guam R. App. P. (\'93GRAP\'94) 7(b)(3).}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Kitano filed a Statement of Issues on Appeal on April 15, 2010, and later filed an Amended 
Statement on April 22, 2010.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The Amended Statement of Issues enumerates
 nine issues which Kitano intended to raise on appeal, including alleged errors in jury instructions and sentencing.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 However, Kitano\rquote 
s Brief filed on July 13, 2010, discussed only the evidentiary issues and the alleged denial of his right to testify.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [53]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
We have previously declined to reach issues that were raised but not analyzed in the appellant\rquote s brief.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 In }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 People v. Quinata}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 , the appellant\rquote 
s brief listed an issue but failed to revisit the issue in the opening brief or in the reply brief.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 1999 Guam 6 \'b6 22.}{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We pointed to former GRAP Rule 13(b)(5), which provided that the brief of the appellant shall include an argument which \'93shall contain t
he contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The argument shall include analysis and explanation of the appellant\rquote s contentions.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  \'b6 23.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We held that this rule together with the rules regarding the consequences of a non-compliant brief require the issue be deemed abandoned.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Id.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  \'b6 25.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [54]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Given our prior decision that failure to brief an issue that is raised in the brief but not otherwise argued in the brief constitutes an abandonment of that issue, we find that here, where the issues are not even mentioned in the appellant\rquote 
s brief but rather only appear in the appellant\rquote s Rule 7(b)(3) statement of issues, those issues have been abandoned by the appellant and need not be addressed in this opinion.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 V.}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 CONCLUSION}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par [55]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The People\rquote s delayed disclosure of Officer Tainatongo\rquote s field notes did not violate Kitano\rquote 
s right to due process under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Brady}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  because the field notes are not ma
terial, there being little probability that its earlier production would have changed the outcome of the trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The People\rquote s
 failure to preserve C.L.\rquote s drawing likewise did not violate Kitano\rquote s right to due process under }{\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 Youngblood}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914  
because there was no showing of bad faith on the part of the police.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [56]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 The trial court\rquote s denial of Kitano\rquote 
s motion to admit the limited testimony of Officer Tainatongo did not violate Kitano\rquote s right to confront his accusers, as Kitano was afforded an opportunity to call Officer Tainatongo to the stand but declined to do so, and any limitation on Kitano
\rquote s ability to effectively cross-examine C.L. or Officer Tydingco was an implication of this tactical decision.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [57]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Finally, Kitano was not denied his right to testify in his own defense because the trial court did not impermissibly interfere in that decision.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{
\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 We hold that although it is advisable for the trial court to obtain an on-the-record waiver of the right to testify from every defendant who does not testify, the failure to do so is not 
reversible error except in limited circumstances, which did not exist in this case.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 
Moreover, we find that the trial court did not prejudge the issue of the admissibility of any impeachment evidence that may have been offered by Officer Tainatongo.
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 [58]}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914  }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is }{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid6887914 AFFIRMED.
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid1972231 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15547431 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431\charrsid15547431 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO}{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid15547431 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431 Associate Justice
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15547431 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431\charrsid15547431 KATHERINE A. MARAMAN}{
\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid6887914\charrsid15547431 
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431 Associate Justice
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6887914 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid15547431 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431\charrsid15547431 ROBERT J. TORRES
\par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid15547431 Chief Justice
\par }}