Case Summary (G.R. No. 154207)
Proceedings Before the MeTC
The MeTC denied petitioner’s appearance on February 1, 2002, holding that Circular No. 19 and Rule 138-A override Rule 138 § 34. A March 4, 2002 order denied reconsideration.
Proceedings Before the RTC
Petitioner sought certiorari and a preliminary injunction to restrain the MeTC from proceeding. The RTC denied injunctive relief on May 3, 2002, reasoning that Grave Threats is prosecutable ex officio without civil indemnity, rendering private prosecution untenable. A June 5, 2002 order denied reconsideration.
Issues
- Whether a law student may appear in an inferior court as agent or friend of a party under Rule 138 § 34.
- Whether the absence of an express civil claim in Grave Threats precludes private prosecution of its civil aspect.
Applicable Rules
• Rule 138 § 34: In municipal courts, parties may litigate in person, or by agent or friend, or by attorney; in other courts, only by attorney.
• Rule 138-A: Law students in approved clinical programs may appear under direct supervision of an accredited attorney.
• Bar Matter No. 730 (1997): Law students may appear personally before inferior courts without lawyer supervision.
Interpretation of Rule 138 and Rule 138-A
Section 34 expressly permits non-lawyers, including law students, to appear as agent or friend in inferior courts. Rule 138-A governs only clinical legal representation of indigent clients under attorney supervision. The courts below misapplied Rule 138-A to bar petitioner’s Section 34 appearance.
Civil Aspect of Grave Threats
Under Article 100, Revised Penal Code, criminal liability carries civil liability unless no actual damage results. No waiver or separate institution of the civil aspect occurred; therefore, the civil action is deemed instituted with the criminal case, permitting private prosecution.
Supreme Court Ruling
The
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 154207)
Facts
- Ferdinand A. Cruz, a third-year law student, filed an Entry of Appearance on September 25, 2000 before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) Branch 45, Pasay City, as private prosecutor in Criminal Case No. 00-1705 for Grave Threats, where his father, Mariano Cruz, is the private complainant.
- Cruz justified his appearance under Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court and the Court En Banc ruling in Cantimbuhan v. Judge Cruz, Jr., which allows non-lawyers to appear as agents or friends in inferior courts.
- He secured prior conformity of the public prosecutor and a written authority from his father appointing him agent in the prosecution.
Lower Court Proceedings
- On February 1, 2002, the MeTC denied Cruz’s entry of appearance, holding that Circular No. 19 on limited law student practice and Rule 138-A (Law Student Practice Rule) supersede Section 34, Rule 138. Trial was set to continue.
- Cruz filed Motion for Reconsideration on February 13, 2002, arguing Rule 138-A cannot override Section 34, Rule 138, but the MeTC denied it on March 4, 2002.
- On April 2, 2002, Cruz petitioned the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 116, Pasay City, for Certiorari and Mandamus with prayer for preliminary injunction to restrain the MeTC from proceeding.
- The RTC, in a Resolution dated May 3, 2002, denied the preliminary injunction, reasoning that Grave Threats is prosecutable ex officio and no civil indemnity was claimed, making private prosecutor intervention legally untenable.
- Cruz moved for reconsideration before the RTC on May 9, 2002; concurrently, he filed a Second Motion for Reconsideration with the MeTC on June 7, 2002, and a Motion to Hold in Abeyance trial on June 10, 2002.
- The RTC denied reconsideration on June 5, 2002. The MeTC denied Cruz’s second motions on June 13, 2002, citing the RTC’s earlier denial of his entry o