G.R. No. 135451 - People vs. Serrano Sr.

The Court, in the exercise of supervision over judges and court employees, initiated disciplinary action due to a palpably erroneous ruling of Judge Pepe P. Domael, Presiding Judge, Branch 37, Regional Trial Court, Naval, Biliran.
The erroneous ruling occurred in Criminal Case No. N-1648, People of the Philippines vs. Danilo F. Serrano, Sr., in which Judge Domael allowed an appeal filed by the prosecution from a decision of acquittal.

On August 1, 1993, Maribel D. Visbal filed with the Regional Trial Court, Naval, Biliran, a sworn complaint charging Danilo F. Serrano, Sr., with rape.
At the arraignment on January 14, 1994, the accused, Serrano, pleaded not guilty.
After trial, on March 6, 1998, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 16, Naval, Biliran, rendered a decision acquitting the accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The decision was promulgated on July 28, 1998.

On August 11, 1998, Assistant Public Prosecutor Federico R. Hunamayor filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court from the decision acquitting the accused, alleging it was contrary to the facts and the law.
On August 24, 1998, Judge Pepe P. Domael issued an order giving due course to the appeal filed by the Provincial Prosecutor.
Clerk III Rey S. Morillo of Branch 37 forwarded the original record of the case to the Court.

Dismissal of the appeal for double jeopardy and directive to Judge Domael to explain

In a resolution dated March 15, 1999, the Court dismissed the appeal for violation of the rule on double jeopardy.
The Court also required Judge Pepe P. Domael to explain why he should not be dismissed from office for gross ignorance of the law.

On March 29, 1999, Judge Domael submitted an explanation stating that he gave due course because the prosecution cited Memorandum Circular No. 3 dated April 1, 1997 of the Department of Justice regarding appeals of decisions of acquittal by the trial court.
Judge Domael admitted he was “caught off-handed” by the prosecution’s nove...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether Judge Pepe P. Domael committed an actionable judicial error warranting disciplinary sanction.

Whether Judge Domael’s act of giving due course to the prosecution’s appeal from an acquittal constituted ignorance of the law.
Whether the error rose to the level of gross ignorance of the law justifying dismissal from service.

Whether the prosecution’s reliance on Department of Justice Memorandum Circular No. 3 (April 1, 1997) could justify an appeal from an acquittal without violating the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.

Whether the constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy bars an appeal from a judgment of acquittal, and whether any exceptions recognized by law apply here.
Whether the accused’s failure to object...(Subscriber-Only)