G.R. No. 162370 - Tiu vs. Court of Appeals

Respondent Edgardo Postanes filed a criminal charge against Remigio Pasion for slight physical injuries (Criminal Case No. 96-412).
Petitioner David Tiu filed a criminal charge against Postanes for grave threats (Criminal Case No. 96-413).
Both cases stemmed from alleged incidents that occurred on November 2, 1995, in Pasay City, Philippines.

Upon motion of Pasion, the two cases were consolidated and jointly heard before MeTC, Branch 44, Pasay City.
During the trial, Postanes testified as a witness for the prosecution in Criminal Case No. 96-412 and as the accused in Criminal Case No. 96-413. He also presented eyewitnesses Jose Aynaga and Aristotle Samson.
Postanes’ affidavits and those of his witnesses were formally offered and admitted as evidence in the slight physical injuries case (96-412).
In the grave threats case (96-413), Postanes adopted the testimonies given in the other case as his own defense and requested more time to submit a formal offer of evidence, which was later denied as belated.
On January 26, 1999, MeTC dismissed both cases due to insufficiency of evidence, amounting to acquittal of Postanes in 96-413.

Tiu filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by MeTC.
Tiu filed a petition for certiorari with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 115, Pasay City, challenging the MeTC’s acquittal order.
On November 6, 2000, the RTC declared the MeTC’s acquittal void and ordered reconsideration of the case.
Postanes filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by the RTC.
Postanes then petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA) for certiorari to annul the RTC decision. The CA issued a resolution denying the issuance of a temporary restraining order.
MeTC suspended proceedings and the presiding judge inhibited herself after motions from both parties.
Eventually, on October 29, 2003, the CA annulled the RTC decision and affirmed the MeTC dismissal of Criminal Case No. 96-413 citing the violation of the accused’s right against double jeopardy.
Tiu’s motion for reconsideration was denied by the CA on February 24, 2004.
Tiu then filed the present petition for review before the Supreme Court.

Whether the filing of a petition for certiorari by Tiu, questioning the acquittal of Postanes by the MeTC, violated the constitutional protection against double jeopardy.
Whether the filing of a Motion to Suspend Proceedings in MeTC by Postanes constituted forum shopping after the Court of Appeals denied his motion for a temporary restraining order.