Zarones says he will file ethics complaint vs OAG

Chief Solicitor James M. Zarones plans to file an ethics complaint against the Office of the Attorney General for prosecuting a traffic case against him despite it having no lawful authority over him.

As this developed, assistant attorney general Jonathan Robert Glass Jr. has insisted that the OAG can continue to prosecute the case against Zarones.

Glass said the OAG has made no motion for recusal or disqualification and no hearing has been held taht would disqualify the OAG from prosecuting the case.

Zarones, who is employed with the OAG, is accused of failing to yield the right of way to another motorist. The traffic citation was issued by a police officer on Oct. 5, 2016.

On Friday, Zarones, who represented himself, filed a motion asking for a bench trial on or before Dec. 23, 2016. He has not waived his right to a speedy public trial. His motion will be heard on Dec. 15 at 1:30pm, in the courtroom of Associate Judge Joseph N. Camacho.

Zarones said the OAG’s Criminal Division does not object to the scheduling of a bench trial on or before Dec. 23, 2016.

Zarones said, however, that the OAG’s Criminal Division stated that if they are removed from this case, then they would want any special prosecutor who is appointed to have sufficient time to prosecute the case.

During the arraignment last Nov. 3, Zarones told the court that he intends to leave the Commonwealth permanently on Dec. 30, 2016.

Due to a court order that a special prosecutor be appointed, the case was set for a status conference on Dec. 1, 2016.

Zarones said to date, the OAG’s Criminal Division has ignored the court’s order to appoint a special prosecutor.

The chief solicitor said the OAG Criminal Division’s continued prosecution of him is a direct violation of the court’s order, violates his right to due process and equal protection of the law, and is a violation of the Commonwealth Rules of Professional Responsibility.

He intended to file yesterday a motion requesting sanctions and dismissal of the case.

Zarones added that he will not tolerate the unethical conduct of OAG’s Criminal Division and that an ethics complaint will be forthcoming.

Zarones said at the Nov. 3 arraignment, he took great care to notify the court that he would not be within the CNMI jurisdiction between Nov. 17 and 27, 2016.

Zarones said the court acknowledged that he would not be available on those dates, but nonetheless, the court subsequently set a status hearing for Nov. 23, 2016, when it was physically impossible for him to attend the proceeding.

Zarones said the court did not provide him with actual or legal notice of the hearing on Nov. 23 and as such, he has no knowledge of what occurred during the ex-parte hearing. Ex-parte hearing means one of the parties in a case is present or heard.

Zarones said the court should set a bench trial on or before Dec. 23, 2016, because any other action will violate his right to a speedy trial under both the CNMI and the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Zarones said he made it clear to the court at his first court appearance that he would not be able to contest this traffic citation if the matter is prolonged.

Zarones said if he is not afforded his right to a speedy trial on or before Dec. 23, 2016, then he will be forced to enter a plea; not because he is guilty but because citizens who contest traffic tickets cannot expect the timely administration of justice in the NMI.

The government, through Glass, filed a brief filed on Friday as to the issue whether the OAG can recuse and then un-recuse itself.

Glass said neither the government nor the defendant moved to recuse the OAG in this case. Glass said no party filed a written motion for recusal in this case either.

“If there was no recusal, there can be no un-recusal,” he pointed out.

The OAG recently filed an emergency motion requesting Superior Court Presiding Judge Robert C. Naraja to reconsider his earlier order that directed the OAG to appoint a special prosecutor to handle the case.