Defendant Robby Narruhn fights rape conviction before high court

Supreme Court of Guam Justices are mulling over an appeal before them filed by convicted rapist Robby Narruhn.

Attorney Peter Perez argued there was no credible defense when Narruhn’s case went before a jury in the lower court.

“The prejudice is there was no opportunity to prepare for trial to develop and file pretrial motions to determine what the defendant’s position was to obtain facts from the defendant and potential witness that the defendant would reveal to the counsel,” said Perez.

Justice Philip Carbullido had questions about the evidence tested by the FBI.

“What is it about the validity of the DNA evidence that may have been compromised or how did this hurt your client,” asked Carbullido 

“Because it established beyond a reasonable doubt that sexual assault occurred, which was inconsistent with the alibi defense by the jury being presented with these diametrically opposed positions, there would be no credibility for the defense and it’s almost an automatics conviction,” replied Perez. 

In February 2022, Narruhn was accused of raping a woman after he broke into her home in Harmon.

He was sentenced to 16 years in prison.

Prosecutor Christine Tenorio argued an alibi was never asserted in the courtroom at trial.

“It is a trial strategy for defense counsels not to attack explicitly when you know the victim is going to give an answer that you might not want to give. But the trial counsel did that by attacking the surrounding circumstances and even through other witnesses. They are asking why didn’t she scream – if she didn’t scream then it must’ve been consensual. The defense counsel actually asked the victim on cross examination isn’t it true that you invited Robby over earlier that day,” said Tenorio. 

As reported, the victim told police she was sleeping when she woke up to find Narruhn sexually assaulting her, adding he was holding a pair of scissors against her lower back to keep her from fighting him off.

“The time that he gives for the alibi there was such a gap in time from the time that the sexual assault occurred,” Tenorio added. 

Justices are mulling over the decision whether to overturn Narruhn’s conviction.

Justice Carbullido: Mr. Perez, Ms. Tenorio stated in her arguments that the defendant was convicted because of her testimony. It didn’t have anything to do with the DNA evidence or the lack of an aggressive representation by defense counsel. That she took the stand, testified and the jury believed her. What is your observation? 

Perez: How would she know? It’s speculative. 

Justice Catherine Maraman: When you say she, who do you mean? 

Perez: Ms. Tenorio.