abad v bieza

7/26/2019 Abad v Bieza

1/5

Today is Friday, June 17, 2016

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

E !"#

M. No. 227-RTJ October 13, 1986

EGORIO R. AA!, co$plainant,

E#ONSO "E$A, respondent&

M. No. R-%61-RTJ October 13, 1986

SANTO P. CRU$, co$plainant,

N. JU!GE I"!E#ONSO M. "E$A, RTC o' (coor, C()*te, respondent&

M. No. %2+9-RET October 13, 1986

*c(t*o 'or !*/(b**t0 Ret*reet.

4e I"!E#ONSO M. "E$A, (*c(t.

R E ' ( ) * T + (

TIERRE$, JR., J.5

o ad$inistrati%e cases ere filed a-ainst Jud-e +ldefonso !le.a of the Re-ional Trial #ourt, !ranch /+/ at !acoor, #a%it

hen he as conte$platin- optional retire$ent due to poor health and the second, after he had filed his application& !tle$ent to disability retire$ent benefits depends on the resolution of these cases&

(ctober 1, 134, )ieutenant #olonel 5re-orio "bad of the Philippine #onstabulary char-ed Jud-e !le.a ith renderinision ith $alice, i-norance of the la, -ra%e abuse of discretion, and $isconduct as a ud-e& The co$plaint is docete

$& #ase o& R82278RTJ&

er a cocfi-ht held at the +$us, #a%ite cocpit on July 1, 131, co$plainant "bad and one Potenciano Ponce had a %ersle hich cul$inated in "bads bein- shot in the chest by Francisco 'abater, Jr&, an alle-ed body-uard of Ponce& 'abat


2/5

s char-ed ith frustrated ho$icide and Potenciano Ponce ith atte$pted ho$icide before the Re-ional Trial #ourt herpondent presides&

e prosecution alle-ed that durin- the afore$entioned cocfi-ht, "bads -a$ecoc lost to the one oned by Ponce& " re$Ponce that co$plainants coc as ea and laced $ore care 9$ahina, ulan- sa ala-a: led to a heated ar-u$ent bet

to but they ere pacified by certain local officials "bad then ent to the cocpit carinderiato tae a snac& Ponce folloshoutin-, ; 96: shots at "bad, the l hittin- hi$ on the chest, the slu- e>itin- at the bac of his ri-ht shoulder& "bad as rushed to the #a%ite Medical #ente

%ite #ity here he underent an operation& (n the 4th day he as transferred to the ?& )una @ospital at Aue.on #ity has a-ain operated on8to re$o%e the slu- i$bedded in his bac& @e stayed in the hospital for 12B days&

bater and Ponce presented a contrary %ersion of the incident&

enciano Ponce testified that on his ay out of the cocpit, "bad uttered obscenities a-ainst hi$ hich he ansered in e%er, co$$on friends lie Mayor Ja$ir of +$us, !aran-ay #aptain EnriCue =ia., and #a%ite #ity Fiscal 5abriel pacifie$& "fter coolin- off, Ponce decided to -o ho$e but on his ay out of the $ain -ate of the cocpit, "bad, ho as drinir at acarinderia,hurled in%ecti%es at hi$& Ponce then approached "bad to as for an e>planation& "bad hit hi$ on the

ehead ith a bottle of beer causin- hi$ to fall don unconscious& *pon re-ainin- consciousness, he as brou-ht to the%ite Medical #enter& Ponce denied ha%in- ai$ed his -un at "bad, insistin- that his -un as ne%er taen out of its holsteo contradicted the testi$ony of "bad that his per$it to carry his firear$ outside of his residence as no lon-er %alid on J131, stressin- that his per$it e>pired on o%e$ber 13, 131&

ncisco 'abater, Jr& testified that he as at the cocpit that sa$e afternoon as a bet taer or casador& @e declared that aut DB0 in that afternoon, he heard "bad utter the folloin- ords at PonceD ;Putan-8ina $o, Pare pipilipitin o an- lee-

nce reacted by approachin- "bad ho then too hold of a beer bottle fro$ the table and hurled it at Ponce hittin- hi$ onehead& Ponce fell don& Thereupon, Francisco 'abater, Jr&, too the -un of Ponce and as "bad refused to be pacified, hnt outside the cocpit and fired the -un fi%e 9: ti$es upards to call the attention of the authorities&


3/5

ntia-o apunan of the then +nter$ediate "ppellate #ourt for in%esti-ation and reco$$endation& The in%esti-atin- Justic$itted the folloin- reco$$endationD

#o$in- to the Cuestion of respondents culpability of the char-es thus le%elled a-ainst hi$ on the bthe facts, the ar-u$ents and the applicable pro%isions of la, it appears inescapable that responde

not co$$itted any ron-doin- to e%oe disciplinary action in acCuittin- Ponce of atte$pted ho$icidThe -round for acCuittal as insufficiency of e%idence due to inconsistencies of the testi$onies of thprosecution itnesses hich he specifically pointed out in the decision& +n addition, respondent founPonce ne%er pulled the -un tuced at his aist durin- the incident, althou-h prosecution itnessestestified otherise& +n the face of conflictin- e%idence, it is difficult to i$pute dishonesty and unfairnerespondent in arri%in- at his conclusion as to hich side told the truth& "nd e%en if he $ade an errorperception of the facts as he sa the$, it cannot be ustly presu$ed that he did it in bad faith or it$alicious intent& For not e%ery error or $istae of a ud-e in the perfor$ance of his duties $aes hiliable therefor& To hold a ud-e ad$inistrati%ely accountable for e%ery erroneous rulin- or decision hrenders, assu$in- that he has erred, ould be nothin- short of harass$ent and ould $ae his pounbearable& 9=i.on %& =e !ora, 5&R& "d$& #ase o& 16B8J, Jan& 23, 171 5a$o %& #ru., 5&R& "d$Matter o& 4678J, (ctober 22, 17 Rodri-o %& Auiano, 5&R& "d$& Matter o& 7B18MJ, 'ept , 1

'ec& of Justice %& Marcos, 5&R& "d$& Matter o, 2078J "pril 22, 177:& For no one called upon to tryfacts or interpret the la can be infallible in his ud-$ent 9Paulino %& 5ue%arra, 5&R& "d$& Matter o#J, March B0, 177 )ope. %& #orpu., 5&R& "d$& Matter o& 428MJ, "u-& B1, 177:&

+ndeed, assu$in- that Ponce really pulled out his -un and pointed it at "bad as he approached hi$ould not be easy to fault respondents reasonin- that Ponce had a$ple opportunity to fire the -un %icti$ if he had the intention to ill hi$& "ll hat Ponce had to do as to press the tri--er hile "badabout to hurl the bottle, or -lass at hi$& (n this point, Justice )uis !& Reyes Re%ised Penal #ode 9p131 ed: has this to sayD

To constitute atte$pted ho$icide the person usin- a firear$ $ust fire the sa$e, ith intent to ill at offended party, ithout hoe%er inflictin- a $ortal ound on the latter&

(n the $atter of the non8i$position by respondent of subsidiary i$prison$ent in case of insol%encydecision did not $ete out the penalty of fine on 'abater& There bein- none, subsidiary i$prison$ennot ha%e been i$posed, pursuant to "rt& B of the Re%ised Penal #ode&

Respondent, hoe%er, as in error in appreciatin- as a $iti-atin- circu$stance ;lac of intention tothe %icti$; in fi>in- the penalty i$posed on 'abater&

>>> >>> >>>

The ind of eapon used by 'abater hich as a &B3 re%ol%er and the location of the ound of "baould undoubtedly -i%e the presu$ption that 'abater had the intent to ill and hich ine%itably ledrespondent to con%ict hi$ of the cri$e of frustrated& For in atte$ptedGfrustrated ho$icide the offend

$ust ha%e the intent to ill the %icti$& +f there is no intent to ill on the part of the offender he is only for physical inuries& Therefore, the fact alone that respondent found 'abater -uilty of the cri$e offrustrated ho$icide ould pro%e that he had no doubt in his $ind that 'abater had the intent to ill "Respondents appreciation as $iti-atin- circu$stance of lac of intent to ill in fa%or of 'abater ispalpably out of place& Presu$ably, hat respondent had in $ind as to consider the $iti-atin-circu$stance of lac of intention to co$$it so -ra%e a ron- as that co$$itted under "rt& 1B of theRe%ised Penal #ode, hich is different fro$ lac of intention to ill&

+t is belie%ed that hile respondent co$$itted an error thus described, the sa$e as done ithout


4/5

or deliberate intent to perpetrate an inustice& !ut in any case, there as ne-li-ence for hich he shbe repri$anded&

"##(R=+5)H, the undersi-ned reco$$ends that respondent be repri$anded, ith arnin- that si$ilar trans-ression in the future ill be $ore se%erely dealt ith&

e reco$$endation is ell taen althou-h the repri$and $ay be dispensed ith considerin- the respondents poor healthi$pendin- retire$ent&

a $atter of public policy, in the absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a ud-e in his udicial capacity areect to disciplinary action, e%en thou-h such acts are erroneous 9Re%ita %& Ri$ando, 3 '#R" 61:& @oe%er, hile uduld not be disciplined for inefficiency on account $erely of occasional $istaes or errors of ud-$ent, yet it is hi-hlyerati%e that they should be con%ersant ith basic le-al principles 9*bon-on %& Mayo, '#R" B0: They are called uponibit $ore than ust a cursory acCuaintance ith statutes 9"ducayen %& Flores, 1 '#R" 73: and to eep the$sel%es abrelatest las, rulin-s and urisprudence affectin- their urisdiction 9?asCue. %& Mal%ar, 3 '#R" 10:&

he case ofAjeno v. Inserto971 '#R" 166, 172:, this #ourt held thatD &&& E%en in the re$ainin- years of his stay in the ud

should eep abreast ith the chan-es in the la and ith the latest decisions and precedents& "lthou-h a ud-e is nearire$ent, he should not rela> in his study of the la and court decisions& 'er%ice in the udiciary $eans a continuous studearch on the la fro$ be-innin- to end&&&

e records fail to sho $alice, ill8ill or e%en bias on the part of respondent ud-e& @is decision pointed out, one by one, trin- inconsistencies in the prosecutions e%idence hich led to the e>culpation of defendant Ponce& +n Pabalan v.evarra 974 '#R" B, 3:, this #ourt held that &&& E%en on the assu$ption that the udicial officer has erred in the appraise%idence, he cannot be held ad$inistrati%ely or ci%illy liable for his udicial action& " udicial officer cannot be called to aci%il action for acts done by hi$ in the e>ercise of his udicial function hoe%er erroneous&&&

e second case doceted as "d$inistrati%e Matter o& R618RTJ as filed by #risanto P& #ru. on =ece$ber 11, 13, a-.a for noin-ly renderin- a ron- ud-$ent& This case ori-inated fro$ the decision in an action for da$a-es filed by o

cifico (ca$po a-ainst co$plainant #ru.&

cifico (ca$po alle-ed in the da$a-e suit that on "pril 16, 134, he filed ith the Manila +nternational "irport "uthority 9Mad$inistrati%e co$plaint a-ainst a certain Ricardo F& (rti. that co$plainant #ru. persuaded @i$ to ithdra the co$ph a threat that if he ould not ithdra the sa$e, #ru. ill cause his dis$issal fro$ the Fire and Rescue =i%ision of thet because he did not accede to #ru. de$and, the latter filed a-ainst hi$ an ad$inistrati%e case for inefficiency and serilect of duty, insubordination, absenteeis$, and habitual tardiness that because of that baseless co$plaint, he has suffebarrass$ent, $ental shoc,an>ieties, sleepless ni-hts, and loss of appetite& +n his anser, #ru. denied noled-e of th

$inistrati%e case beteen Pacifico (ca$po and Ricardo (rti. and a%erred that (ca$pos inefficiency, absenteeis$, anddiness are substantiated by co$pany records&

er trial, the respondent ud-e ruled in fa%or of Pacifico (ca$po& @e ordered co$plainant #ru. to pay (ca$po the su$ o0,000&00 for $oral da$a-es, PB0,000&00 for e>a$plary da$a-es and P,000&00 for attorneys fees&

e ad$inistrati%e co$plaint filed by #ru. alle-ed that the respondent ud-e disre-arded the defendants incontro%ertibledence and noin-ly rendered a ron- ud-$ent a-ainst hi$&

is co$$ent, the respondent ud-e alle-ed that the decision, subect $atter of this case, is pendin- appeal before ther$ediate "ppellate #ourt& This alle-ation as not refuted by the co$plainant& Thus, any action e can tae in this case

pre$ature& For only after the appellate court holds in a final ud-$ent that a trial ud-es alle-ed errors ere co$$ittedberately and in bad faith $ay a char-e of noin-ly renderin- an unust decision be le%elled a-ainst hi$& This is the


5/5

nounce$ent of this #ourt in se%eral cases 9'ee 5arcia %& "lconcel, 111 '#R" 173 'ta& Maria %& *bay, 37 '#R" 17 ahol %& RiodiCue, 64 '#R" 44:& +n the $eanti$e, the presu$ption is that official duty as re-ularly perfor$ed&

EREF(RE, + ?+E< (F T@E F(RE5(+5, the ad$inistrati%e cases are hereby, =+'M+''E=& The reco$$endation de 6, 134 sub$itted by the #ourt "d$inistrator that the respondent ud-e be retired fro$ office due to hypertensi%e hea

ease and con-esti%e heart failure ith cardio$e-ally 9enlar-ed left %entricle: under Per$anent Total =isability, as endor"ntonio ?alero of this #ourt, is hereby "PPR(?E=&

(R=ERE=&

ia, Yap, Fernan, Narvasa, Melencio!errera, Ala"pay, #ru$, Paras and Feliciano, JJ., concur.

&an'ee, #.J., is on leave.

)aphil Proect 8 "rellano )a Foundation

abad v bieza

Documents