G.R. No. 229781 - De Lima vs. Guerrero

Senate and House inquiries on drug syndicates in New Bilibid Prison (NBP) triggered multiple complaints against petitioner Senator Leila M. De Lima and others.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) consolidated these cases and a DOJ Panel conducted a preliminary investigation in December 2016.
Petitioner filed various motions questioning DOJ’s jurisdiction and sought to inhibit the DOJ Panel; these motions were resolved against her.
Separate petitions assailing DOJ’s jurisdiction were filed with the Court of Appeals but were pending when DOJ filed Informations.

On February 17, 2017, the DOJ Panel filed three Informations charging De Lima and co-accused with violations of Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002), docketed before RTC Muntinlupa Branch 204.
Charges alleged illegal drug trading from November 2012 to March 2013 involving extortion and receipt of illegal drug proceeds by De Lima, used to fund her senatorial bid.
Petitioner filed a Motion to Quash the Information for lack of jurisdiction, insufficient allegations, hearsay evidence, and multiplicity of offenses.
The RTC issued an order on February 23, 2017 finding probable cause and issued a Warrant of Arrest against De Lima without bail recommendation.
Petitioner was arrested on February 24, 2017 and committed to PNP Custodial Center.

On February 27, 2017, petitioner filed a petition before the Supreme Court assailing the RTC’s orders, warrant, and failure to resolve the Motion to Quash.
The plea included prayers to annul the RTC orders, enjoin further proceedings until resolution of the Motion to Quash, and restore her liberty.
The respondents argued procedural deficiencies, forum shopping, and supported the RTC’s jurisdiction and issuance of the warrant.

Allegations arose that petitioner falsified jurats in her verification and certification against forum shopping; affidavits from the notary disputed this claim but revealed technical non-compliance.
Oral arguments were conducted on March 14, 21, and 28, 2017.

Whether petitioner was excused from the doctrine on hierarchy of courts considering that the petition should have first been filed with the Court of Appeals.
Whether the pendency of the Motion to Quash renders the petition premature.
Whether petitioner violated the rule against forum shopping considering the pending Motion to Quash and petition in the Court of Appeals.
Whether the verification and certification against forum shopping filed with the Supreme Court were valid and sufficient.

Whether the RTC or the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over the offense charged under R.A. 9165 averred in the Information.
Whether the RTC judge gravely abused her discretion in finding probable cause to issue the warrant of arrest despite the pending Motion to Quash.
Whether petitioner is entitled to provisional reliefs such as Temporary Restraining Order or Status Quo Ante Order pending resolution of the petition.