Judge threatens to dismiss suit vs Stanley

Superior Court judge Juan T. Lizama said yesterday he would dismiss the criminal charges against ex-congressman Stanley Torres and two other co-defendants if government prosecutors fail to comply with his earlier ruling that directed the amendment of charging documents to include the name of attorney general Pamela Brown.

Lizama gave deputy attorney general Clyde Lemons Jr. and chief prosecutor David Hutton a 15-day ultimatum, saying in open court that he would issue a written order compelling the government attorneys to comply with the earlier ruling. The judge also threatened the attorneys with possible monetary fines and other sanctions if they fail to comply.

This developed during a hearing on the request of co-defendant Frank Ada to dismiss the charges, citing delay in the prosecution of the case. Ada’s lawyer, Edward Arriola, said his client and the other defendants have yet to be arraigned, more than five months after the filing of the criminal charges last March 10.

“They [prosecutors] have to comply with the court’s order,” Lizama said. “I can’t see [any reason] why you can’t comply with the order.”

Lemons said the court should do what it deems appropriate, adding that the prosecution respects the dignity of the court. Lemons asked that Hutton be spared from possible sanctions, to which the judge replied that the chief prosecutor should then put take hands off the case.

Hutton replied that Lizama seems to be suggesting that Ada’s co-defendants join in the dismissal request on the ground of delay even if they did not indicate doing so. Hutton added that he should also be sanctioned with Lemons, should the judge impose any on them.

During the proceedings, Lizama instructed Torres’ lawyer, former attorney general Robert Torres, to draft the order giving the prosecutors a 15-day ultimatum. Later, however, Lizama said he would draft the order himself.

Lizama’s May 25 ruling directed the prosecutors to amend the charging documents to include the name of the attorney general on whose authority the case was being brought to court. In that ruling, he dismissed the request of Stanley Torres, Ada, and co-defendant Dolores Bermudes to quash the charging documents that did not bear the attorney general’s name.

Hutton maintained that Lizama’s determination to have the charging documents amended came out even if the judge ruled that there is no law that requires the inclusion of the attorney general’s name in the criminal information. Prosecutors raised this matter before the Supreme Court.

Stanley Torres had opposed Brown’s confirmation to the post of attorney general when it went before the Senate. Lawmakers opposed to Brown’s confirmation assailed its legality.

Brown had just been confirmed to the post when the charges against the congressman were filed in court. Hutton claimed, though, that the investigation against the congressman began even before Brown was confirmed. Records showed that Lemons and Hutton signed the charging documents—not Brown.

The prosecutors charged Stanley Torres with five counts each of misconduct in public office, conspiracy to commit theft, conspiracy to commit theft by deception and illegal use of public supplies, services, time, and personnel.

They filed against Sablan five counts each of the last three offenses. Additionally, the prosecutors filed five counts each of theft, theft by deception, and receiving stolen property against her.

Ada faces four counts each of conspiracy to commit theft and conspiracy to commit theft by deception, and illegal use of public supplies, services, time, and personnel.

The criminal information alleged that Sablan received at least five checks totaling $5,384.67 in government payroll in 2003, when she was actually off-island. Sablan used to be Stanley Torres’ office manager. Ada allegedly prepared fraudulent time and attendance sheets indicating that Sablan rendered work.

Meanwhile, Lizama indicated that he was inclined to deny Ada’s request to dismiss the charges on the ground of delay.

In moving for the case’s dismissal, Ada’s lawyer had cited his client’s right to speedy trial and procedural rules that state: “If there is unnecessary delay in filing an information against a defendant who has been held to answer, or if there is unnecessary delay in bringing a defendant to trial, the court may dismiss the information or complaint.”

Arriola said other jurisdictions have comparatively shorter periods of time within which defendants should be brought to trial.

Lemons said the prosecution has not been delaying proceedings. He said the delay arose from the dispute whether or not the attorney general’s name should be included in the charging documents, stressing that it was the defendants that started the request for the inclusion of Brown’s name.