Bellas chides AGO

Justice delay is justice denied.
Superior Court Associate Judge Timothy H. Bellas has admonished the Attorney General’s Office for what he said inexcusable and neglectful delay in prosecution of a criminal contempt case.
In dismissing the contempt charge, Judge Bellas said there was no reason for the government’s delay of almost eight years in a relatively uncomplicated case against Faustino Takeshi.
The case stemmed from the failure of Mr. Takeshi to appear on trial on April 22, 1991 for the criminal case where he was charged with one count of assault with a dangerous weapon for attacking Leoncio Iskawa.
Mr. Takeshi, who was represented by his lawyer Daniel Bowen, was arraigned and a jury trial was held which he attended until April 22, 1991. This led the court to issue a warrant for his arrest and a $10,000 bail was set.
It later turned out that Mr. Takeshi had moved to Rota for work and was unaware of the bench warrant issued against him. Mr. Takeshi claimed that since he had apologized to the victim and paid restitution, he believed the matter had been settled by his lawyer.
There was no evidence to prove that while he was living in Rota, Mr. Takeshi made any effort to change or hide his identity to elude government authorities. He was even arrested for reckless driving and DUI on Oct. 30, 1992.
On Feb. 21, 1998, Mr. Takeshi was arrested and charged with various offenses including illegal possession of a rifle. The pre-sentence report prepared on Feb. 5, 19991 reflected the outstanding bench warrant of April 22, 1991.
Mr. Takeshi was formally charged with criminal contempt in an amended information on June 17, 1999 for failing to appear for trial on April 22, 1991. According to the government, the delay in charging Mr. Takeshi was a result of his non-appearance in April of 1991.
The government claimed that since it did not know of Mr. Takeshi’s whereabouts until he was located, the “desire for further investigation justified delaying the charging of the decision until he was located.”
On Oct. 17, 1999, Mr. Tekeshi sought a dismissal of the information claiming that the government’s failure to prosecute the case violated his right to a speedy trial under the Commonwealth and the United States Constitution.
Mr. Takeshi asserted that serving a criminal contempt charge more than three months after it was filed and nine years after the filing of the original information smacked of bad faith and violated the statute of limitations.
Judge Bellas noted that the government waited for nearly eight years after the warrant had been issued and four additional months after discovering the warrant to file an information charging the defendant with contempt for failing to appear in April of 19991.
Since his nonappearance, the government did nothing to locate Mr. Takeshi and tarried another four months before serving the defendant’s counsel with the new information for a 19991 charge.
“Contrary to the reasons recited to justify the investigative delay, the timing of these events suggests instead that the government was merely busy with other maters that it considered more important than locating the defendant and prosecuting him for criminal contempt,” Judge Bellas said.