Case Digest (G.R. No. 132977)
Facts:
Mayor Luis Mondia, Jr., Robinson Galanza, Rufino Mondia, Manny Mondia, Jr., Norberto Espanola, Rodrigo Mondia, Jr., Samson Mondia, Joel Treyes and Pat. Ernesto Eneserio, Jr. v. Deputy Ombudsman/Visayas Area Graft Investigation Officer II Edgardo G. Canton, et al., G.R. No. 132977, November 29, 2000, Supreme Court First Division, Ynares‑Santiago, J., writing for the Court.On February 12, 1993, Corazon J. Odelmo filed a criminal complaint before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman (Visayas) docketed as OMB‑VIS‑CRIM‑93‑0253, accusing petitioners of the murders of her husband and father‑in‑law on December 31, 1992. After preliminary investigation, the Deputy Ombudsman filed two Informations for murder on January 17, 1994 with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 62, Bago City, which became Criminal Cases Nos. 1112 and 1116; arrest warrants were issued.
Petitioners moved to recall the warrants and to quash the Informations for failure to furnish copies of the Ombudsman's December 14, 1993 Resolution. The presiding RTC judge, Marietta Hobilla‑Alinio, stayed execution of the warrants and quashed the Informations on January 26, 1994. The Ombudsman sought certiorari relief before the Supreme Court in G.R. Nos. 118813‑14; on April 8, 1997 this Court set aside the RTC order and directed that the cases be remanded to the Ombudsman for completion of the proceedings and that subsequent incidents be immediately indorsed back to the RTC.
Rather than seek reconsideration of the Ombudsman's finding of probable cause, petitioners requested a clarificatory hearing in April and June 1997 because the complainant had executed conflicting affidavits. The Deputy Ombudsman initially forwarded the motion to the Provincial Prosecutor and requested reinvestigation, but later revoked that directive. The Office of the Special Prosecutor/Ombudsman in Manila sought warrants and speedy trial setting; on October 8, 1997 the Deputy Ombudsman issued the first assailed Order denying the motions for clarificatory questioning; a January 8, 1998 Order denied reconsideration.
Petitioners then filed this special civil action for certiorari and mandamus seeking annulment of the two Deputy Ombudsman Orders and an order directing completion of the preliminary investigation or reinvestigation. The Office of the Solicitor General and the Office of the Chief Legal Counsel, Office of the Ombudsman, filed Comments. Meanwhile the RTC (Branch 62) on March 3, 1999 suspended proceedings in Criminal Cases Nos. 1112 and 1116 pending the Ombudsman's resolution and this Court's disposition. Petitioners later presented sworn affidavits by members of the Odelmo family (and an unsworn manife...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Deputy Ombudsman commit grave abuse of discretion or act in excess of jurisdiction by denying petitioners' motions to conduct clarificatory questions and to reinvestigate OMB‑VIS‑CRIM‑93‑0253?
- Should Criminal Cases Nos. 1112 and 1116 be dismissed because of the Ombudsman's delay in completing the preliminary investigation and because complainant and her children exe...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)