Subpoena for Torres’ financial records opposed

Ralph DLG Torres

The defense team of former governor Ralph DLG Torres is opposing the Office of the Attorney General’s request for a subpoena that would compel the former governor to produce his financial records as discovery in his ongoing criminal case.

The OAG has asked the Superior Court for a subpoena duces tecum to obtain Torres’ Bank of Guam account records. This type of subpoena essentially requires a person to produce certain documents, records, or other tangible items in their possession, custody, or control.

However, in opposing the subpoena, Torres, through his defense team, has asked the Superior Court to quash the request.

“The subpoena duces tecum should be quashed as it is clearly for discovery purposes,” the defense stated.

According to Torres’ lawyers, the subpoena ultimately does not comply with the law.

“It lacks any showing that the requested documents are relevant to, or necessary to prove, any issue in the 13 counts currently pending in [this case],” the defense stated.

It noted that the subpoena improperly directs the documents to be handed over to the OAG rather than the court.

“Additionally, the subpoena is not authorized by law as the special prosecutor’s appointment, contract, and admission status are invalid, which means the validity of the subpoena depends, upon other things, on the validity of the special prosecutor’s appointment, contract, and admission status. Until the validity of the special prosecutor’s appointment, contract, and status is resolved, the subpoena cannot be deemed to be authorized by law,” the defense team said.

The defense also argues that the prosecution is simply saying it wants to investigate Torres’ expenditures because it wants to and not because it is related to any legitimate law enforcement inquiry.

“Neither the subpoena nor the notice served on [the defendant] identifies a compelling governmental interest [that] justifies the intrusion into Mr. Torres’ confidential and private bank records. The failure to show a compelling governmental interest warrants quashing the subpoena for financial records and information,” the defense said.

Also, Torres’ attorneys argued that because Torres is married, the subpoena does not make any effort to protect his wife’s privacy interest in the marital bank account.

“Mr. Torres is married, which makes the bank account subject to the subpoena marital property under Commonwealth law. The Commonwealth’s subpoena does not make any effort to protect Diann’s privacy interest in the marital bank account and, even more so, is not narrowly tailored to ‘weed out’ or preclude governmental intrusion into transactions related to Torres’ wife, family matters, and other matters unrelated to whatever is the compelling governmental interest, if any,” the defense stated.

Lastly, Torres’ lawyers argue that because Commonwealth law dictates that a person’s bank account number is confidential, quashing the subpoena is warranted as the prosecution did not redact Torres’ bank account number when requesting a subpoena.

“The Commonwealth only acquired Mr. Torres’ Bank of Guam account number through the performance of official duties. Neither Mr. Torres nor the Bank of Guam gave written consent for the disclosure of the bank account number. The public disclosure, therefore, is unauthorized. This unauthorized public disclosure results from the prosecution’s failure to redact the bank account number as required by NMI [law]. The prosecution not redacting the bank account number in the filing with this court is not only unauthorized but is also a violation of the constitutional privacy right. These warrant quashing the subpoena,” the defense team said.