Case Digest (G.R. No. L-24529)
Facts:
Eduardo Jimenez v. Republic of the Philippines and Judge Pedro Navarro, G.R. No. L-24529, February 17, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Angeles, J., writing for the Court. Petition for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, with preliminary injunction, was filed challenging the attempted promulgation of a criminal judgment.Petitioner Eduardo Jimenez and others were charged with homicide in an information dated May 13, 1960, before the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Criminal Case No. 9531). The case was tried before Judge Eulogio Mencias, who prepared, signed and delivered his decision to the clerk of court on January 16, 1965. The clerk issued notice the same day ordering the petitioner to appear for promulgation on January 21, 1965.
January 21, 1965 was declared a special holiday and the scheduled promulgation could not be held; on that date Judge Mencias reached the age of 70 and thereby retired. Judge Pedro Navarro was designated to replace Judge Mencias and initially set promulgation for January 29, 1965, which was later postponed to March 1, 1965. On March 1, 1965 petitioner filed a motion to set aside the decision and its promulgation, arguing that because Judge Mencias had ceased to be a judge at the time of promulgation, the decision could not validly be promulgated as an official act. The private prosecutor opposed the motion.
On April 2, 1965 respondent Judge Navarro denied the motion and ordered that the decision be promulgated. Petitioner then brought the present original petition to the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the order denying his motion, restraint of the promulgation, and a directive for re-examination and rendition of decision by the court. The Solicitor General defended the validity of promulgation so long as the decision had been signed and delivered to the clerk during the judge’s term.
The parties and the Court discussed the governing rules on promulgation: the pre-Revised Rules provision, Sec. 6, Rule 116 (promulgation by the judge who rendered it; clerk may read when judge is absent or outside the province) and the post-Revised Rules version, Sec. 6, Rule 120, with largely similar language permitting promulgation in the presence of any judge of the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May a judgment prepared and signed by a judge during his incumbency be validly promulgated after that judge has ceased to be a judge?
- Given the facts (Judge Mencias having retired before promulgation), must the unpromulgated decision be declared null and void and the order denying the motion to se...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)