Title
Bambo-Jorin vs. Singson
Case
A.M. No. MTJ-92-678
Decision Date
Feb 24, 1994
Judge reprimanded for negligence in penalty imposition, improper adjournments, and oversight in probation order, but no bad faith found.

Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-92-678)

Allegations Against the Respondent

The complainant, Olivia L. Bambo-Jorin, filed a sworn letter-complaint against Judge Arnulfo A. Singson for alleged negligence, unjust judgment, incompetence, and ignorance of the law concerning Criminal Cases Nos. 5714 and 5715, which involved the charges of Slight Physical Injuries and Oral Defamation, respectively. The cases had been inherited by Judge Singson in 1989 from his predecessors.

Irregularities Claimed by the Complainant

The allegations against the respondent Judge included several irregularities:

  1. The issuance of a Notice of Promulgation of Judgment on April 1, 1992, for a decision dated April 2, 1992, compelling the parties to appear on April 6, 1992.
  2. The sentence handed down in the Slight Physical Injuries case lacking a specified period for the penalty and imposing a fine of P200.00 in the Oral Defamation case without consideration of the defendant’s professional status as a teacher.
  3. Unjustified adjournments in trial proceedings beyond the allowed periods without written authorization from the Chief Justice.
  4. Directing the accused to report to the Probation Officer without providing the trial prosecutor an opportunity to comment on the Order.

Respondent's Defense

In his defense, Judge Singson characterized the error in the promulgation date as a clerical mistake attributed to his stenographers. He acknowledged the procedural missteps regarding trial adjournments but justified these actions as standard practice accepted by both counsels. Concerning the imposition of fines, he deemed the imposed P200.00 fine as discretionary, though he admitted the lack of a defined penalty period for Slight Physical Injuries was an oversight due to an accumulation of pending cases in his court. Judge Singson asserted that notice to the prosecutor regarding probation applications was not legally required based on existing legislation.

Evaluation and Recommendations by the RTC

The matter was escalated to Judge Alejandro A. Marquez, Vice-Executive Judge of Morong, Rizal, for evaluation and recommendations. Judge Marquez suggested a one-month suspension of Judge Singson for his alleged failures. However, upon a review of the case, the available evidence did not substantiate claims of bad faith against Judge Singson. It was concluded that his primary fault was negligence i

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.