SUPERIOR Court Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja has ordered the Office of the Attorney General to file a request for a new arrest warrant and to personally serve Willie Carnell Frink with both the new arrest warrant and the probable cause order previously issued in the case.
The judge said Frink’s counsel “shall provide the Government with sufficient information, including current contact details or any other necessary information, to facilitate proper service. The Government shall file proof of service with the Court upon completion,” Judge Naraja added in a 13-page order issued on March 25, 2026.
He said no further proceedings will be scheduled in the case until the arrest warrant is issued.
Frink, 42, a steward supervisor of a maritime prepositioning ship, was arrested in November 2022 after he was accused of sexually assaulting a female crewmember.
After hearing testimony from an investigating officer at a preliminary hearing, the Superior Court concluded that there was insufficient evidence to detain Frink for trial, and dismissed the case. The prosecution then filed a petition in the CNMI Supreme Court, requesting an order reinstating the charge.
In 2023, the CNMI Supreme Court vacated the Superior Court’s dismissal and reinstated the charges against Frink, allowing the prosecution to continue.
In his recent order, Judge Naraja likewise granted the defense’s motion to quash the warrant issued in November 2022.
Frink, through attorney Colin M. Thompson, has argued that the mandamus order was limited to reinstating the charges and did not confer or affirm the court’s personal jurisdiction.
For his part, Judge Naraja said, “A dismissal without prejudice does not constitute a final judgment and does not preclude further proceedings as permitted by law.”
“Here, the Mandamus Order implicitly affirmed this principle by reinstating the charges and remanding the case for a determination of probable cause,” the judge added,
The information filed by the OAG on Nov. 23, 2022, charged Frink with sexual assault in the first degree, sexual assault in the second degree, assault and battery, and disturbing the peace.
By reinstating the charges, the CNMI Supreme Court effectively restored the case to its pre-dismissal status, Judge Naraja said.
“Because Frink was originally charged while physically present in the Commonwealth, personal jurisdiction had already been established. Once properly conferred, personal jurisdiction is not automatically extinguished by a dismissal without prejudice. Rather than requiring re-establishment from the beginning, the reinstatement continues the previously initiated prosecution and preserves this court’s ability to proceed. Holding otherwise would undermine the purpose of reinstatement by allowing jurisdiction to be nullified solely due to a prior procedural dismissal,” Judge Naraja added.
As to the issue of whether the trial court retains the authority to find probable cause even if the defendant is absent once charges are reinstated, Judge Naraja cited the CNMI Supreme Court order, which stated: “This directive necessarily confirms the [trial] court’s authority to carry out its mandate.”
“The Commonwealth Supreme Court also underscored judicial efficiency and based on its review of the preliminary hearing transcript, concluded that the existing evidence was sufficient to establish probable cause. Given that Rule 4(a) allows probable cause findings in a defendant’s absence, defendant Frink’s presence is not required,” Judge Naraja stated.
As to the defense’s argument that the general rules do not apply to the case because the probable cause order explicitly required the government to personally serve him and file proof of service, Judge Naraja said, “While the Government is correct that general service rules allow for service upon counsel, this argument is unavailing because a specific court order requiring personal service prevails over a general procedural rule. Here, the [High] Court exercised its discretion to impose a personal service requirement, which was mandatory.”
The judge said the CNMI Supreme Court “exercised additional diligence to ensure that all procedural considerations were properly addressed to minimize the risk of further appellate review.”
While procedural diligence is critical, he added, “the CNMI Supreme Court has underscored that judicial efficiency must not be compromised in a manner that obstructs substantive justice.”
In light of these concerns, Judge Naraja reiterated that “procedural mechanisms should not be invoked in a manner that delays or frustrates the fair adjudication of cases.”
“Going forward, the Court notes that recharging a case — rather than pursuing a writ of mandamus — may offer a more efficient path when challenging probable cause determinations. The prosecution retains the authority to refile charges following dismissal without prejudice, a procedural mechanism that often allows for a more direct means of proceeding with a case. Adopting this approach will uphold the Commonwealth Supreme Court’s directive on judicial efficiency while ensuring that cases proceed on their merits without undue delay,” Judge Naraja said.
Background
The alleged victim told police that she and Frink were co-workers and that he was her supervisor.
She said that on Nov. 11, 2022, around 1 p.m., she hung out with Frink and later went swimming at a hotel.
She said Frink told her that he had rented a room at another hotel where they could hang out together.
According to the victim, while swimming, she and Frink drank alcoholic beverages in the pool bar area. She told investigators that because it was happy hour, Frink bought her rum and Coke. After the second drink she said, she started feeling very dizzy, nauseous, and shaky.
She said she was not feeling good when they went to the hotel room that Frink rented. She said she took a shower and while in the bathroom she threw up and later sat down on the bed due to dizziness.
Frink, she said, offered her a massage. She said she was hesitant to oblige, although Frink’s hands were already on her shoulders. She said she shrugged Frink off, but he laid her down on the bed and started rubbing her back with lotion.
She said she tried to squirm away, but Frink held her back and told her to “just relax.” The victim said at that point she was feeling very confused.
She said she began to black out and “all of a sudden Frink was having sexual intercourse with her without her consent.”
