Case Digest (G.R. No. 257358)
Facts:
Atty. Moises De Guia Dalisay, Jr. v. Office of the Ombudsman Mindanao and Atty. Dexter Rey T. Sumaoy, G.R. No. 257358, December 05, 2022, Supreme Court Third Division, Inting, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Atty. Moises De Guia Dalisay, Jr. filed an Affidavit‑Complaint dated April 12, 2018 against private respondent Atty. Dexter Rey T. Sumaoy, then City Administrator of Iligan City, for violations of Section 3(e) of RA 3019, Article 171 of the RPC, and various administrative offenses including alleged misuse of government vehicles in breach of AO 239 (s. 2008) and falsification of Daily Time Records (DTRs). The complaint alleged that respondent appeared as private counsel for John Philip Aragon Burlado in a libel case before Branch 44, RTC Initao on August 1 and August 14, 2017, used a government vehicle to attend conferences on those dates, and falsified his DTR to show full workdays when he was absent.
Respondent denied criminality and asserted that Mayor Celso G. Regencia authorized his private practice and specifically directed him to represent Burlado because the case arose from official duties; he produced a July 25, 2017 memorandum of Mayor Regencia and approved travel requests dated August 1 and 14, 2017. Petitioner replied that Burlado was a job‑order worker (thus not entitled to government counsel), that the libel was in Burlado’s personal capacity, and that respondent’s appearance constituted unauthorized private practice under Section 12, Rule XVIII of the Revised Civil Service Rules.
The Office of the Ombudsman (Mindanao) dismissed both the criminal and administrative complaints for insufficiency of evidence in a Joint Resolution dated May 16, 2019, and denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in a Joint Order dated October 16, 2020. Petitioner file...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Ombudsman commit grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in dismissing the criminal charges under OMB‑M‑C‑18‑0324 for violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 and Article 171 of th...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)