Ex-Commerce secretary argues that conspiracy allegations also time-barred

Former Commerce Secretary James Santos has filed a motion that echoed Lt. Gov. Timothy P. Villagomez’s argument that the allegations in the conspiracy charge against them are time-barred.

Santos, through counsel Victorino DLG. Torres, asked the U.S. District Court for the NMI to order that the entire alleged transactions that occurred between 1998 to 2000 should be stricken as they are time barred.

Torres said the alleged transactions could not even be considered an “over act” to be even included in the indictment as the government even acknowledged that they have been negotiated and fully executed.

“The government’s conduct to include activities over eight years ago is improper; there is a grave danger of undue prejudice which could easily confuse the issues and mislead the jury,” said Torres in Santos’ motion to strike.

Santos’ co-defendant, Lt. Gov. Villagomez, through counsel David J. Lujan, in a motion to dismiss asserted that the applicable statute of limitations of five years for a conspiracy bars any and all allegations and or counts that rely on the overt acts alleged by the U.S. government.

Lujan said the indictment does not contain a single allegation of any overt act or wrongdoing of Villagomez or any co-conspirator between Jan. 4, 2000 and Aug. 7, 2007.

The indictment charged Villagomez, James Santos and his wife Joaquina, and former Commonwealth Utilities Corp. executive director Anthony Guerrero, with wire fraud, conspiracy, and theft involving federal funds.

The four allegedly conspired to bilk the CNMI government out of thousands of dollars through business deals involving chemical purchases for CUC.

In the motion, Torres said Santos and co-defendants are charged to have committed a conspiracy which has a statute of limitation of five years.

Torres said the U.S. government has alleged overt acts which occurred between Feb. 6, 1998 to Jan. 4, 2000.

“These allegations clearly fall outside the statute of limitations and must be stricken entirely from the indictment,” he said.

The lawyer cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that has clearly established that the statute of limitation must be satisfied as to each object of a conspiracy when the government charges a multi-object as it has done in this case.

Torres said the last over acts for the 1998 to 2000 is Jan. 4, 2000 whose statute of limitation ends on Jan. 4, 2005.

“Accordingly, the entire transactions which allegedly occurred between 1998 to 2000 should be stricken entirely since they were not charged within the applicable time period of five years,” he said.

Torres said the allegation stemming of activities over eight years ago substantially affects Santos’ s ability to properly investigate, prepare and formulate a proper and meaningful defense.

“It would be impractical to formulate a defense when many witnesses are no longer available and those that are available, their memories are limited,” he said.