Case Digest (G.R. No. 209195)
Facts:
Manuel J. Jimenez, Jr. v. People of the Philippines, G.R. Nos. 209195 and 209215, September 17, 2014, Supreme Court Second Division, Brion, J., writing for the Court.
On May 18, 2009 and June 11, 2009, Manuel A. Montero, a former employee of the BSJ Company owned by the Jimenez family, executed sworn extrajudicial statements confessing participation in the killing of Ruby Rose Barrameda and naming Manuel J. Jimenez, Jr., his brother Lope Jimenez, and others as co-conspirators; the statements led to the recovery of a cadaver encased in a drum and steel casing at the site Montero identified. On August 20, 2009 the People filed an Information in RTC Criminal Case No. 39225-MN charging Jimenez, Lope, Lennard Descalso, Robert Ponce, Eric Fernandez and Montero with murder.
Montero filed a motion to be discharged as an accused and to be made a state witness pursuant to the Witness Protection Program and Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure; the prosecution also moved for his discharge. Acting RTC Judge Hector B. Almeyda denied the prosecution’s motion on March 19, 2010, finding noncompliance with Section 17. Montero and the People sought reconsideration, and upon his appointment Judge Zaldy B. Docena reversed Judge Almeyda on July 30, 2010, granting Montero’s discharge as a state witness on the ground that his extrajudicial confession was absolutely necessary, was substantially corroborated in material points, and that Montero did not appear to be the most guilty. Jimenez moved for reconsideration and for inhibition; Judge Docena denied inhibition on December 29, 2010, and on June 29, 2011 issued an omnibus order denying reconsideration and granting another defendant’s motion to suspend proceedings.
Jimenez petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA) for certiorari under Rule 65; the CA initially granted his petition on May 22, 2012 but on the People’s motion for reconsideration the CA issued an Amended Decision (ponencia by Justice Jose Reyes) that held Judge Docena did not commit grave abuse in discharging Montero under Section 17, Rule 119, but ordered the case re‑raffled to another sala to avoid any claim of bias. Both parties filed motions for partial reconsideration which were denied, prompting...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in ruling that Judge Docena did not commit grave abuse of discretion in granting the motion to discharge Montero as a state witness under Section 17, Rule 119?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in ordering the re‑raffle of Criminal Case No. 39225‑MN to another RTC branch f...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)