SAYING that the requests to reconsider the sanctions imposed on defense attorney Keith Chambers II and Assistant Attorney General James Kingman are “not well-founded,” Superior Court Associate Judge Kenneth L. Govendo denied both motions.
Earlier, he sanctioned Chambers and both sanctioned and disqualified Kingman from prosecuting Shayne Villanueva, who was charged with contempt of the Legislature.
The judge also denied Kingman’s motion to quash the subpoena that required the assistant AG to testify as a witness in the trial, saying that the motion was “not well-founded.”
In addition, the judge granted the defense’s cross-motion to recuse the assistant AG, stating that “Kingman should not remain the prosecutor in this matter to ensure procedural integrity and due process for all parties throughout the court proceedings.”
In that order, the judge reprimanded Kingman and ordered him to pay a $500 fine for violating the model rules of professional conduct, specifically for “abusing his prosecutorial power and authority, which led to his forced recusal for bias and lack of impartiality.”
Likewise, Judge Govendo reprimanded Villanueva’s attorney, Chambers, and ordered him to pay a $500 fine for violating the model rules of professional conduct, specifically for “harming the administration of justice and wasting resources by withholding crucial information and inconveniencing other parties.”
The latest order
In a seven-page order issued on Dec. 30, 2024, Judge Govendo denied the motion to reconsider the public reprimand and sanctions he imposed on Chambers.
The judge also denied the request of Kingman to stay sanctions and to vacate attorney sanctions temporarily.
The judge, moreover, denied both attorneys’ requests for order to show cause.
Chambers’ due process rights were not violated, Judge Govendo said.
In his motion for reconsideration Chambers said, “Before the Order, the Court did not: (1) notify Mr. Chambers that the Court was contemplating sanctioning Mr. Chambers; (2) order Mr. Chambers to respond in writing to an order to show cause regarding sanctions; and (3) hold a hearing to allow Mr. Chambers to argue before the Court as to why his conduct was not sanctionable.”
But according to Judge Govendo, “Chambers ignored the repeated warnings and admonishments for his unprofessionalism [that] Presiding Judge Naraja had given him regarding [his] conduct as defense counsel….”
Judge Govendo noted that at the Nov. 18, 2024 status conference, he expressed his displeasure and warned of the potential for further disciplinary action due to both counsels’ “unethical and unprofessional conduct.”
“Therefore, Chambers had more than adequate notice that he would be liable for fines for his conduct,” the judge said. “It is, of course, Chambers’ right to request a hearing, and he was given adequate time to do so. However, a hearing would not resolve any issues as they were already detailed and expansive in the prior filings.”
According to the judge, “Chambers’ actions were sanctionable for being unethical, unprofessional, and not reasonable.”
“Chambers provided no nexus connecting his untimely recusals and delaying tactics to the issue, which was whether his client could plead the Fifth Amendment to avoid charges of legislative contempt,” the judge said.
Representing the Commonwealth and Kingman, Chief Solicitor J. Robert Glass Jr. requested a stay of Kingman’s sanctions.
Glass also requested that the sanctions imposed against Kingman and Chambers be vacated until after the trial, and that the court issue an order to show cause following the trial.
But Judge Govendo said Kingman’s “due process rights were not violated.”
“A hearing would not add any additional information, given that Kingman’s violations were already noted, and he was recused and subpoenaed as a witness,” the judge said.
“Kingman’s actions were outside the proper scope of his employment,” the judge added. “Kingman’s sanctions were due to his ex-parte comments that the defendant claimed were threatening before the charges were filed.”
Kingman’s actions were not “legitimate and violated the prosecutor’s duty,” Judge Govendo said.
He extended the deadline for Kingman and Chambers to pay their fines until Jan. 27, 2025, in consideration of their holiday schedules and respect for their due process rights.
“Refusing to pay the fine could result in sanctioned attorneys being held in contempt of the Court,” the judge said. “The Court would express its continued disappointment in Chambers’ and Kingman’s actions and reserves the right to take further disciplinary action if necessary. The Court incorporates this modification into the Order by reference.”
Chambers paid the $500 sanction on Dec. 30 Variety learned.
Background
Villanueva’s bench trial, originally set for Nov. 6, 2024, was rescheduled for Dec. 3, 2024. But because the parties informed Judge Govendo of other pending motions, he rescheduled the trial for Jan. 27, 2025.
The case was reassigned to Judge Govendo after Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja recused himself from the case. The judge is the uncle of Rep. Ralph N. Yumul, the chair of the House special committee that found Villanueva in contempt of the Legislature. Villanueva has pled not guilty to the charge.
When asked questions about BOOST by the House special committee, he invoked his Fifth Amendment right.
BOOST stands for “Building Optimism, Opportunities and Stability Together,” a $17 million federally funded program.
Villanueva is the owner of Roil Soil Marketing, which the administration of then-Gov. Ralph DLG Torres contracted to help implement BOOST in 2022.
