On July 11, 2006 the Judicial Efficiency Act became law through Public Law 28-137:1. Subsequently, on September 15, 2006, our Supreme Court adopted its Administrative Rule 06-001 regarding Case Management & Disposition establishing time standards for the disposition of cases and matters pending before the Superior Court of Guam. Through these two mechanisms, additional vital components of the Unified Judiciary’s commitment to transparency, accountability and efficiency were put in place. Consistent with the Act and Rule, the information provided here continues our commitment to provide timely and meaningful information to the public regarding the functioning of the Judiciary. Rule 06-001 and the time standards adopted therein regarding the efficient and prompt disposition of cases which all judges on the bench have committed to meeting can be reviewed by clicking through the following link:  

It is important to note that there are many different avenues cases might take as they work their way through the justice system.  Cases might technically remain “open” while they are in fact in a sort of “holding pattern.” These cases are considered inactive and are not included in our analysis since doing so would give an inaccurate impression of the system’s efficiency. Examples of this include cases involving criminal defendants that have plead guilty and are currently subject to a period of probation; alleged family violence criminal defendants that are enrolled in the diversion program; criminal defendants that have entered into deferred plea agreements with the Office of the Attorney General for a specific period of time; criminal defendants that have entered drug court programs or civil cases that have been referred to an alternative dispute resolution model in efforts to facilitate settlement. Additionally, many open criminal cases involve outstanding bench warrants and are similarly inactive. We have made efforts to exclude the inactive cases from the case closure rate calculations to provide as accurate a picture as possible regarding cases that remain open and active beyond the deadline contemplated by the time standards.
To view data regarding how many criminal and civil cases were assigned to each judge during the data sample period and the performance of each judge in terms of their “case closure rate” with regards to the data sample period please click through the following link:

Also provided here is information about motions and other matters currently pending before each individual judge. The time standards state that all motions taken under advisement by a judge should be decided within 90 days and matters other than motions should be decided within 120 days. These deadlines are consistent with the Judiciary’s efforts to improve the efficiency of the court system.