HAGÅTÑA (The Guam Daily Post) — The Office of the Attorney General is moving to have all testimony and evidence presented at a hearing last week for the Guam Regional Transit Authority corruption case be struck from the record.
Two days after Alejo C. Sablan, board chair for Guam Transit, called employees of the Office of the Attorney General to testify at an evidentiary hearing in the Superior Court of Guam in an attempt to disqualify the AG’s office from prosecuting Sablan on corruption charges due to a conflict of interest, the attorney general filed several motions.
Sablan is facing corruption charges related to the hiring of Richard Ybanez as former GRTA interim executive manager without “having a requisite college degree.” However, Sablan argues, since Assistant Attorney General Tom Keeler advises the GRTA board, there is a conflict of interest.
At the evidentiary hearing, where Keeler and Chief Deputy Attorney General Joseph Guthrie were called as witnesses, Sablan’s defense counsel, comprising William Brennan and Joaquin “Jay” Arriola Jr., asked the two OAG employees about a conflict wall being in place during the investigation and prosecution of Sablan, whose co-defendants include Ybanez, Transit certifying officer Jennifer Badar Cruz, and board members Hågat Mayor Kevin Susuico and Inalåhan Mayor Anthony Chargualaf.
Hearing
The hearing was set to continue Monday before Judge Alberto Tolentino after Keeler and Guthrie gave testimony on Wednesday. It was expected that Attorney General Douglas Moylan and acting Chief Prosecutor Gloria Rudolph were to be called as witnesses, but on Friday Rudolph filed several motions related to what was presented and said during the hearing Wednesday.
The Guam Daily Post observed, in particular, Guthrie’s testimony as he was asked a series of questions about email exchanges among himself, Keeler and Moylan regarding the status of the acting interim executive manager of GRTA, Ybanez, and Ybanez’s qualifications.
Guthrie responded several times that he did not remember the emails or what was discussed. However, he confirmed at the time they were sent he was responsible for ensuring potential conflicts of interest were addressed at the AG’s office.
Once shown the emails, Guthrie said he vaguely remembered them, but could not confirm if a wall to prevent potential conflicts of interest was in place for the GRTA case.
Then, after Guthrie testified, Keeler was called to testify about emails discussing Ybanez’s qualifications as GRTA’s interim executive manager.
In particular, the emails involved Moylan explaining a complaint was made regarding Ybanez not meeting the requirements for the position. However, Keeler explained in the email that Ybanez, although he does not have the requisite degree, meets qualifications in years of experience working in transportation-related services.
“Sorry, but it isn’t clear to me that Mr. Ybanez is improperly in his interim position,” Keeler wrote in another email to Moylan.
It was also revealed during the hearing, as Keeler was reading through defense exhibits, that former GRTA interim Executive Director Cel Babauta had made a complaint regarding Ybanez’s qualifications.
Motions
One of Rudolph’s motions is a request to have Guthrie’s and Keeler’s testimony and the admitted evidence, which included the email exchanges, be struck from the record.
Rudolph’s basis for the motion is that Sablan and his counsel having possession of documents she deemed as “work product” and protected under “attorney-client privilege” violates Guam law.
“The testimonies of … Guthrie and … Keeler should be struck. As such, good cause clearly exists to strike the documents and testimony because the information sought through testimony exposes the private mental impressions and legal theories of the people’s counsels and should be excluded under the work-product doctrine,” Rudolph stated.
“Here, a criminal defendant elicited information regarding the discussion of legal matters and legal strategies from the team involved in the investigation and prosecuting this criminal matter. This is a clear violation of the attorney-client privilege and constitutes good cause to strike all testimony from the Nov. 1, 2023, hearing,” Rudolph added.
As a remedy, Rudolph requested not only that the record be stricken, but also that Sablan and his counsel return the documents as they were “inadvertently produced.”
In another motion, Rudolph, who was removed from the courtroom during Guthrie’s testimony at the request of Sablan and his counsel since she will be called as a witness, asked Tolentino to reconsider her exclusion from the courtroom. Rudolph explained her sequestering violated the right of the people of Guam to have effective counsel.
She also added that after her removal, two prosecutors present had recently joined the AG’s Office and were “not expected nor prepared” to represent the people as they were not familiar with all the legal issues involved with the motion to disqualify.
Other motions filed included asking for a protective order to ensure Moylan, Rudolph and an AG’s investigator are not called to testify and for Tolentino to determine whether an ethical wall is necessary in the GRTA corruption case.
Defense
In light of the motions filed, which may have an effect on Sablan’s initial motion to have the AG’s office disqualified, Arriola told the Post it was clear a conflict exists.
“It is abundantly clear after Wednesday’s hearing that the Office of the Attorney General has a clear conflict of interest in prosecuting the GRTA board members and the former acting executive manager,” Arriola said.
“The exhibits really tell it all,” he added.
The seal of the Office of the Attorney General of Guam is shown May 4, 2023, at the ITC Building in Tamuning.
Alejo C. Sablan
Richard Ybanez
