THE Superior Court has denied the defense’s request to reconsider its ruling denying the motion to dismiss the contempt of Legislature case against Shayne Villanueva.
In his seven-page ruling on Friday, Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja also admonished the prosecutor and defense counsel.
“Instead of exercising due diligence, counsel for both parties have engaged in personal attacks throughout these proceedings,” the judge said. “These unacceptable behaviors by both counsels were explicitly displayed both in the pleadings and its attached exhibits. The Court is deeply disappointed by this conduct, as it has wasted judicial resources merely reviewing both counsel’s personal attacks rather than addressing the merits of the allegations — particularly when the Motion for Consideration and its attached exhibits were not filed in a timely manner, and the Court no longer has jurisdiction. While the court had conditionally admitted the email communications between counsel as exhibits, it now appears these communications were primarily used as vehicles for counsel to attack each other rather than to support allegations central to this case,” the judge added.
He also denied the defense motion to admit into evidence the communications between attorney Keith Chambers, who represents Villanueva, and Assistant Attorney General James Kingman, the prosecutor, regarding Villanueva’s criminal exposure related to the questions for which the defendant invoked his Fifth Amendment right during a House committee hearing.
“These communications cannot constitute newly discovered evidence because they were available to defendant before he filed his motion to dismiss on May 29, 2024,” the judge said. “Merely submitting previously available evidence does not satisfy the standard for reconsideration. The fact that the emails were exchanged between the counsels’ email addresses strongly suggests that defendant had possession of these communications prior to the judgment on the initial motion to dismiss.”
Judge Naraja said the defense “failed to exercise due diligence with respect to this evidence.”
The judge finds no basis to grant the defendant’s motion for reconsideration, “whether based on newly discovered evidence, the need to correct clear error, or the prevention of manifest injustice.”
“Defendant does not allege any intervening change in controlling law,” the judge added. “Rule 12(b) of the Commonwealth Rules of Criminal Procedure remains unchanged and continues to govern the review of the dismissal of defendant’s contempt charge, which was based on defendant’s assertion of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.”
The judge noted that Villanueva presents two primary arguments for reconsideration.
“First, he argues that the Court’s use of the term ‘investigation’ in its order constitutes clear error. Second, he contends that email communications between counsel constitute ‘new evidence’ showing he was under investigation prior to the March 5th hearing. Neither argument warrants reconsideration,” the judge said.
Background
Villanueva is the owner of Roil Soil Marketing, which the administration of then-Gov. Ralph DLG Torres contracted to help implement BOOST in 2022.
BOOST stands for “Building Optimism, Opportunities and Stability Together,” a $17 million federally funded program.
On March 5, 2024, Villanueva appeared before the House Special Committee on Federal Assistance & Disaster-Related Funding and invoked his Fifth Amendment right when asked questions about BOOST. After the committee found him in contempt, Speaker Villagomez transmitted to Attorney General Edward Manibusan a “certification of statement of contempt” pertaining to Villanueva.
On March 22, 2024, Villanueva self-surrendered at the Department of Corrections after an arrest warrant was issued against him for contempt. He posted $1,000 bail for his release.
During an arraignment on April 2, 2024, Villanueva pleaded not guilty to the charge of contempt of Legislature.
In August, Judge Naraja denied the defense motion to dismiss the contempt of Legislature case against Villanueva.
The following month, Chambers requested the court to reconsider its ruling denying their motion to dismiss the contempt of Legislature case, saying that his client was being investigated prior to the March 5, 2024 legislative hearing.
This motion was denied by the court on Friday.
