Case Digest (G.R. No. 231854)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Leila L. Ang, Rosalinda Driz, Joey Ang, Anson Ang, and Vladimir Nieto, G.R. No. 231854, October 06, 2020, the Supreme Court En Banc, Carandang, J., writing for the Court.The Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon (OMB‑Luzon) found probable cause on April 4, 2005 to indict respondents — Leila L. Ang (Document Analyst, DBP‑Lucena), Rosalinda Driz (Branch Teller), and private respondents Joey Ang, Anson Ang, and Vladimir Nieto (owners of certain corporate accounts) — in three separate criminal informations for falsification, malversation (Art. 217, RPC) and violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, all arising from an alleged P4,840,884 cash shortage at DBP‑Lucena following a special audit in 1999. Informations were filed on November 10, 2005 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Lucena.
In December 2009 respondent Leila Ang served an Amended Request For Admission (RFA) on the People; the City Prosecutor received it January 5, 2010. The Office of the City Prosecutor (OCP‑Lucena) moved to expunge (Jan. 27, 2010), and RTC‑Lucena, Branch 53 denied the RFA and ordered expunction (Apr. 13, 2010). After a motion to inhibit the presiding judge the cases went to RTC‑Lucena, Branch 56 (Judge Dennis R. Pastrana), which granted partial reconsideration (Joint Order, Feb. 12, 2015) and deemed the prosecution’s failure to respond within 15 days an implied admission under Section 2, Rule 26, Rules of Civil Procedure.
The OCP filed a Motion for Clarification claiming improper service; Judge Pastrana denied the motion as tardy and ruled on July 24, 2015 that service on the City Prosecutor sufficed and that the implied admissions amounted to judicial admissions under Section 4, Rule 129. Respondent Ang and the other accused manifested adoption of those admissions in the companion informations. The People deputized Atty. Michael Vernon De Gorio as special prosecutor (Jan. 14, 2016), filed their own RFAs, and moved to consolidate the three cases for joint trial (order May 16, 2016).
In a Joint Order dated March 10, 2016 the RTC denied the People’s RFAs and took judicial notice that the People’s implied admissions (from Criminal Case No. 2005‑1048) applied to the other cases; a September 5, 2016 Joint Order denied reconsideration. The People filed a Rule 65 certiorari petition to the Sandiganbayan (SB), which dismissed it (Decision, Mar. 1, 2017) and denied reconsideration (Resolution, May 15, 2017), noting also alleged defects in verifi...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is a Request for Admission under Rule 26 of the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable in criminal proceedings?
- Did the Regional Trial Court commit grave abuse of discretion by treating implied admissions under Rule 26 as judicial admissions and taking judicial notice of them across the consolidated criminal cases?
- Was Atty. Michael Vernon De Gorio, deputized by the Ombudsman, authorized to represent the People in seeking cer...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)