Case Digest (A.M. No. 07-11-592-RTC)
Facts:
In Re: Transfer of Hearing of A.M. No. 07-11-592-RTC Criminal Case Nos. 13308 (People v. Crisostomo Armamento) and 13337 (People v. Mark Antony Perez) from RTC-Branch 4, Batangas City to the Bureau of Corrections, Muntinlupa City, A.M. No. 07-11-592-RTC, March 14, 2008, the Supreme Court Third Division, Reyes, J., writing for the Court.The matter arose from an undated letter sent by Judge Albert A. Kalalo of RTC, Branch 4, Batangas City, notifying the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) that the accused in two pending criminal cases—Criminal Case No. 13308 (People v. Crisostomo Armamento, charged under Sec. 5, Art. II of R.A. No. 9165) and Criminal Case No. 13337 (People v. Mark Antony Perez, charged with murder)—were detained and serving sentences at the New Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City. The accused were routinely transported to Batangas City whenever hearings were scheduled.
The OCA evaluated the situation and, in its November 13, 2007 recommendation, proposed that the Branch Clerk of Court forward the records to the executive judge in Muntinlupa City for raffle; that the judge drawn there conduct the entire trial within the Bureau of Corrections (assisted by at least two personnel); that the case records be returned to RTC Branch 4, Batangas City for preparation of decisions; and that the records thereafter be sent back to Muntinlupa for promulgation of the decisions. The OCA acted out of concern for security risks and government expense involved in transporting detainees.
The matter was submitted to the Court (via the OCA) for guidance. The Court, sitting as the Third Division, reviewed the OCA recommendation and the authorities cited, and disposed of the administrative matter by an original-resolution order directing Judge Kalalo per...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May a judge who conducts the trial hearings be replaced by another judge who will render the decision based solely on the records?
- Should the OCA recommendation—that records be raffled to Muntinlupa judges to try the cases there and then returned to Batangas for preparation of decisions—be implemented?
- Does the doctrine in U.S. v. Abreu permit a successor judge to decide a case on the predecessor’s record where the predecess...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)