FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (June 15, 2020 – Hagåtña, Guam) – Senator Therese Terlaje and the Committee on Justice welcomed officials from the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) as well as the Public Defender Service Corporation (PDSC) to present information on the current legal landscape of self-defense law.  The forum was held to provide better insight into the current state of Guam’s laws, its effectiveness in protecting individuals at home and in public spaces, the existing limits on the use of force for the purpose of defending one’s own life, the lives of others, or in defense of property, the rates of successful claims of self-defense, along with challenges encountered in self-defense cases, and other relevant information on self-defense.

During the informational forum, Assistant Attorney General Sean Brown clarified that the use of deadly force self-defense is any force used to protect oneself, if that force can cause death or serious bodily injury, such as a firearm or knife, bat or motor vehicle. There are three limitations which include the following:

·       Must be a response to someone who might be experiencing death, serious bodily harm, kidnapping or criminal sexual conduct

·       Could not have provoked the need for deadly force

·       A duty to retreat

Deputy Director of PDSC, John Morrison, cited a report issued by the United States Commission on Civil Rights which concluded more times than not, the person that used deadly force had a criminal background and these laws are more likely to be invoked in situations where there is a fight that is escalating rather than during home invasions. The Deputy Director also stated he has not seen a case where deadly force has been used during a home invasion since the Castle Doctrine was enacted in 2014.

Both Attorneys Brown and Morrison reiterated that Guam’s law provides for the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense did not occur, if it should be invoked, with Attorney Morrison stating that this provision makes Guam’s self-defense law more robust than most other states in the nation.

Following the informational forum, a public hearing was held for Bill 47-35, authored by Senator Joe San Agustin, which would expand the “Castle Doctrine”, removing the duty to retreat in the use of deadly force self-defense in any location a person has the right to be, commonly known as “Stand Your Ground.”

Senator Terlaje referenced a report from the American Bar Association’s National Task Force on Stand Your Ground (SYG) Laws which does not recommend the enactment of such legislation, based on broad studies that have found the following:

·       An individual’s right to self-defense was sufficiently protected prior to the enactment of SYG laws.

·       SYG States have experienced an increase in homicides.

·       The application of SYG law is unpredictable, uneven, and results in racial disparities.

·       Victim’s rights are undermined in States with statutory immunity for criminal prosecution and civil suits related to SYG cases.

The Oversight Chair also remarked during the hearing that the NAACP and the ACLU recommended against SYG measures.

Senator Terlaje noted that the Castle Doctrine allows the use of deadly force without the duty to retreat in one’s home, place of business and vehicle and notes that right to self-defense does not cease to exist outside of those places stating, “If self-defense is invoked, under Guam law, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense did not occur. We were assured that this provision is strong and continues to preserve the individual right to self-defense, ensuring reasonableness and fairness in the application of justice.”

Testimony in support of and in opposition to Bill 47-35 were received by the committee.  Written testimony can be submitted via email to senatorterlajeguam@gmail.com through Jun 29, 2020.