Randall Fulcher testified in exchange for a reduced sentence.
Guam – Day seven of the re-trial of accused murderer Allan Agababa continued with cross examination of Randall Fulcher, a convicted felon testifying in exchange for reduced sentencing.
“Now you had a number of charges against you that you did not plead guilty to, correct? Fulcher: Correct. Van de Veld: But you did plead guilty to possession of a scheduled two controlled substance as a third degree felony, correct? Fulcher: Correct. Van de Veld: Two charges of a scheduled four controlled substance as a third degree felony, correct? Fulcher: Correct. Van de Veld: and possession of a scheduled one controlled substance correct? Fulcher: Correct.”
Agababa’s attorney Curtis Van de Veld focused on the credibility of Fulcher as a witness, going over Fulcher’s plea agreement with the Attorney Generals Office. Van de Veld questioned Fulcher about his interpretation of the agreement with the AG’s Office stating that he was to aid in the prosectution of Allan Agababa.
“And in return for that they agreed that they would not prosecute you for other crimes arising from the facts that you described in not only the case of Agababa as
to what you may have done but as to the remaining charges relative to your drug activities, correct,” asked Van de Veld.
Fulcher responded, “I thought it was just for the Agababa case, I didn’t realize it was for my other case.”
Van de Veld stated that Fulcher was promised a sentence of five years for each of the felony charges and that by testifying against Agababa he was “working that sentence down” However, Fulcher did not agree and the Prosecution further disagreed.
“Objection your honor, this mis-states the nature of this plea agreement the defendant has not been convicted of any crime. Defense counsel is stating the possibility of sentencing as if it were a factual certainty and that not accurate,” stated Assistant Attorney General Jeremiah Luther.
The AG argues that the five years indicated is the maximum amount of time Fulcher would possible serve, and that Van de Veld was ” jumbling up the prior statements of the plea agreement.”