Attorney Ramon K. Quichocho is insisting that former police officer and now Rep. Christopher George D. Leon Guerrero is qualified to provide expert opinions for him in a racketeering lawsuit.
Attorney Michael Dotts, who represents Quichocho, said that Leon Guerrero was a police detective for over 20 years and investigated about 50 cases involving fraud.
Dotts said Leon Guerrero also has training on tracing funds and fraudulent activities and even has Federal Bureau of Investigation training.
Dotts also said that Quichocho’s accuser, Jung Ja Kim, failed to point out what would qualify an expert to testify with regard to fraud and the concealment of funds.
Kim, a businesswoman, has filed a racketeering lawsuit in federal court against her then counsel, Quichocho.
Quichocho retained as his expert Leon Guerrero, who was then owner of LG Private Investigation Services. His expert report was filed on July 27, 2012.
In that report, Leon Guerrero had stated that Kim was using a series of corporate entities that she in fact controlled to hide assets from her former husband and the Division of Revenue and Tax.
Leon Guerrero had also stated, among other things, that Kim was using other individuals to accomplish the same purposes of concealing corporate entities.
Attorney Colin Thompson, counsel for Kim, recently asked the U.S. District Court for the NMI to exclude Leon Guerrero’s testimony as an expert witness.
Thompson asserted that Leon Guerrero’s opinions are “unreliable, lack of any logical or methodical basis, and lack facts or identifiable data.”
Thompon said that Leon Guerrero’s opinions are not relevant and that his testimony will not aid the jury.
In Quichocho’s reply, Dotts said the methods that Leon Guerrero used is the same ones that he used in his 20-plus years as a criminal investigator.
Dotts said Leon Guerrero’s opinions are highly relevant because what really happened was that Quichocho was only one in a series of attorneys Kim used to help her conceal assets.
Dotts said that Kim can test Leon Guerrero’s opinions on cross-examination and can also argue them at closing arguments.