Opinion ID: 705213
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Tampering with Public Records

Text: 12 Cruz challenges his conviction of three counts of tampering with public records in violation of 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 55.10 on the ground of insufficient evidence. He claims specifically that (1) the real property was insufficiently identified; (2) another person created the fictitious tax updates; and (3) he didn't know the tax updates were false because no legal title to the real property was established, the real property was insufficiently identified, and he could not have falsified a document which did not already exist. We conclude that sufficient evidence supports Cruz's convictions for tampering with public records. 13 First, Cruz argues that the government failed to adduce sufficient evidence to permit the jury to conclude that he had caused Vincent Cruz, a Property Tax Technician in the Department of Revenue and Taxation, to create a tax update on the fictitious lots because both Vincent Cruz and Ray Blas, the Real Property Tax Administrator, failed to identify the lots. We reject this argument. 14 The three lots of real property involved were identified on the indictment as Lot 154A, Umatac; Agua, Merizo; and Gumoje, Merizo. It is true that Blas did not identify precisely for which lots Vincent Cruz asked permission to create escaped assessments. But Vincent Cruz testified that he was summoned to Joseph Cruz's office on several occasions and asked to prepare some tax statements relating to Umatac, Gumoje and Agua. Anderson testified that he asked Cruz for a tax area receipt and documents for Lot 154A, Umatac, as well as Lot 521 and 522 located in Merizo. After Anderson's request, an escaped assessment for Lot 154A, Umatac was apparently created by the Department of Revenue and Taxation. We conclude that Vincent Cruz's identification of the real property by name was sufficient where the indictment identified the Merizo lots only by name and where the testimony of Anderson supplemented the identification by Vincent Cruz. 15 Cruz next argues that the government adduced evidence tending to show that Ray Blas, not Joseph Cruz, caused Vincent Cruz to create tax updates on the properties in issue. We reject this argument. Vincent Cruz testified that Joseph Cruz asked him to make some tax statements related to Gumoje and Agua. He testified that he created the requested tax documents for the lots and delivered them to Cruz. Blas testified that he authorized Vincent Cruz to create the tax records because he believed Joseph Cruz had identified properties which had escaped tax assessment. We conclude that this permission by Blas could not insulate Cruz from liability as the moving force behind Vincent Cruz's creation of the false tax records. 16 Cruz further argues that the evidence was insufficient to show that he knew the tax updates were false and intended that they be received as genuine government records because (1) no title to the lots in question was ever established; (2) the superseding indictment referred to the lots by name, not number; and (3) it is illogical to infer that [Cruz] falsified a record that did not already exist. 17 Cruz's argument that the government failed to prove title to the real property in issue is meritless, as discussed above. Furthermore, we conclude the evidence was sufficient for the jury to have found that Cruz falsified records by causing false records to be created. Tampering with public records includes knowingly mak[ing] a false entry in, or false alteration of, any record ... belonging to ... or kept by ... the government. 9 Guam Code Ann. Sec. 55.10(a)(1). Vincent Cruz testified that Cruz directed him to create tax records ostensibly curing an escaped assessment. We conclude that the jury could have found the creation of a new tax record constituted making an entry in the tax records. When combined with other evidence tending to show that the tax records Cruz directed Vincent Cruz to create were false, we conclude the jury could have found that Cruz caused the relevant tax records to be altered falsely at Cruz's direction. Thus Cruz's illogical argument is equally meritless. Finally, Vincent Cruz asked Cruz for deeds or other documentation to support the creation of the retroactive tax records for each escaped assessment. Each time Cruz told him to just use Claimant for the owner. We conclude that evidence of Cruz's failure to present any documentation to Vincent Cruz to support the creation of the retroactive tax records was sufficient to permit the jury to conclude that Cruz understood the tax updates he was requesting to be false.