Case Digest (G.R. No. 209330) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Secretary Leila De Lima, et al. v. Mario Joel T. Reyes (G.R. No. 209330, January 11, 2016), the late Dr. Gerardo “Doc Gerry” Ortega, a radio anchor in Palawan, was fatally shot on January 24, 2011 inside the Baguio Wagwagan Ukay-ukay in Puerto Princesa City. Marlon B. Recamata was immediately arrested and confessed, implicating Rodolfo “Bumar” Edrad and others. On February 6, 2011, Edrad executed a sinumpaang salaysay alleging that then-Governor Mario Joel T. Reyes ordered Ortega’s killing. Two days later, pursuant to Department Order No. 091, Secretary De Lima constituted a First Panel of prosecutors to conduct the preliminary investigation. On June 8, 2011, that panel dismissed the complaint for lack of probable cause. Dr. Patria Inocencio-Ortega, the victim’s widow, filed motions to reopen and for partial reconsideration, both of which the First Panel denied on September 2, 2011. On September 7, 2011, Secretary De Lima issued Department Order No. 710, revoked the First Pan Case Digest (G.R. No. 209330) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the Crime
- On January 24, 2011, veterinarian and radio anchor Dr. Gerardo “Doc Gerry” Ortega was shot dead in Puerto Princesa City, Palawan.
- Marlon B. Recamata was arrested shortly after, confessed extrajudicially, and implicated Rodolfo Edrad, Dennis Aranas, Armando Noel Jr., and former Governor Mario Joel T. Reyes as mastermind.
- DOJ Proceedings and Panels
- February 7, 2011: Secretary De Lima issued Department Order No. 091 creating the First Panel (Dayog, Cacha, Medina) to conduct preliminary investigation.
- June 8, 2011: First Panel dismissed the complaint for lack of probable cause.
- June 28 and July 7, 2011: Complainant moved to re-open and for reconsideration to admit additional evidence (mobile phone communications); motions denied September 2, 2011.
- September 7, 2011: Secretary De Lima issued Department Order No. 710 creating the Second Panel (Mariano, Barcellano, Gaerlan) to reinvestigate “in the interest of service and due process” and to admit evidence denied by the First Panel.
- Judicial Challenges
- October 2011: Respondent Reyes filed petition for certiorari and prohibition before the CA assailing DO 710.
- March 12, 2012: Second Panel found probable cause, recommended filing of informations; March 27, 2012: trial court issued arrest warrants.
- September 2011–March 2012: Parallel petitions for review ad cautelam before DOJ and supplemental CA petitions.
- Court of Appeals Decision
- March 19, 2013: CA Special Division declared DO 710 null and void for grave abuse of discretion, reinstated First Panel resolutions, holding Sec. De Lima should have used NPS Rule on Appeal procedures.
- September 27, 2013: CA denied motion for reconsideration, affirming that the Second Panel lacked authority to admit or weigh evidence.
- Supreme Court Petition
- Petitioners (Sec. De Lima and Second Panel) filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 65 before the SC.
- Respondent Reyes filed comment; petitioners replied.
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that the Secretary of Justice gravely abused her discretion by issuing Department Order No. 710 to create a Second Panel?
- Was issuance of DO 710 an executive function beyond certiorari/prohibition?
- Is the Secretary of Justice authorized motu proprio to designate another panel for reinvestigation to prevent miscarriage of justice?
- Has this Petition for Certiorari been rendered moot by the filing of the information and the trial court’s issuance of an arrest warrant (per Crespo v. Mogul)?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)