Ex-CUC board chair’s motion to suspend imposition of six-year jail term denied

Superior Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman has denied former Commonwealth Utilities Corp. board chair Francisco Q. Guerrero’s motion to suspend the execution of the court’s sentencing order that slapped him with a six-year prison term for 11 charges related to allegations of sexual abuse of a minor girl.

In denying Guerrero’s motion for a stay of the execution issued on Friday, Wiseman determined that the defendant failed to raise any substantial questions as to law or fact likely to result in reversal of his conviction or the ordering of a new trial.

The judge pointed out that he explicitly found that he based his finding of defendant’s guilty on the credibility of the victim’s testimony.

“Although arguably the expert testimony regarding coping mechanisms could have shed light on any possible inconsistencies of a victim’s testimony, the court never found the victim’s testimony to lack any credibility,” Wiseman said.

Therefore, Wiseman continued, even if the admissibility of the expert testimony were erroneous, which defendant has failed to establish, it is not more probable than not that any potential error in its admission materially affected the verdict.

Guerrero, 33, was ordered to start serving his sentence yesterday, Dec. 1, 2013, at the Department of Corrections. He is expected to be released on Nov. 30, 2019.

Last July, a jury acquitted Guerrero of two counts of a sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree, but Wiseman found him guilty of 11 charges: three counts of assault and battery, five counts of disturbing the peace, two counts of indecent exposure in the second degree, and sexual abuse of a minor in the fourth degree.

Last Nov. 19, Wiseman sentenced the former CUC board chair with a six-year jail term that he will serve without the possibility of parole.

Guerrero, through counsel Brien Sers Nicholas, appealed and filed the motion for a stay of execution of his sentence.

Nicholas asserted that a stay is warranted because the defendant is neither a flight risk or a danger to the community, he is not appealing the case for the purpose of delay, and the government’s alleged withholding of Brady material and the expert testimony by Julian Camacho raise substantial questions of law or fact likely to result in a reversal of his conviction or an order for a new trial.

Brady material refers to a piece of evidence known to the prosecution that is important for establishing the innocence or reducing the punishment of a defendant.

Assistant attorney general Margo Brown, counsel for the government, opposed the motion.

In denying the motion, Wiseman said Guerrero has not only failed to establish that the materials requested were Brady materials but has also failed to show that even if they were Brady materials, that any alleged suppression constituted a violation.

On Camacho’s testimony, Wiseman said the Division of Youth Services staff’s testimony was admitted for the purposes of addressing the issues of delayed reporting and coping mechanisms of victims.

The judge said Camacho never testified as to the credibility of the victim.

According to the court’s commitment order, Guerrero began sexually molesting the now 17-year-old girl in 2010 when she was in the 9th grade and continued doing so up to May 2012 in five different occasions.