urgent omnibus motion jun 21 2013

7/24/2019 Urgent Omnibus Motion Jun 21 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/urgent-omnibus-motion-jun-21-2013 1/7

-*

-tltse

I1.

0FRIE

c0pr

TTIE

PEOPLE

OF

THE

P}IILPPINES

Plaintiff,

ERIIESTO

L.

DTLOS

SAr{TOS,

Accused

---x

1.

2.

(;

RtrPUBLIC

OF

THtr

PHILIPPINBS

First

Judicial

Region

Regional

Trial

Court

Branch

60, Baguio

City

Crim.

Case No.

32306-R

URGEITT

OMMBUS

MOTION

FOR

INHIBITION

TO DEFER

PROCEEDINGS

FURTHER

PENDING

RESOLUTIONOF'

THE

INSTANT

MOTION FOR

INHIBITION

Accused., ATTY.

ERNESTO

DE LOS

SANTOS, through

the

undersigned

counsel

and

unto

this

Honorable

Court,

most respectfully

states that:

1.

The

instant

case

was

originally

raffled

before

Branch 7,

Regional

Tria-l court of

Baguio

City

before

Judge

Lisa V.

'Iiongson-Tabora.

By

reason

of

an

Urgent

motion

to Recuse attributing

acts on the

pa,rt

of the

presiding

judge

of

alleged

"malevolent

disregard of a

settled

jurispruderee,

bordering on apparent

gross

ignorance

of

the law',

the lhen

presiding

judge

granted

the

private

complainalt's

Motion

to

Recuse

in

an

order

dated

Octolrer

OS,

ZOLZ;

2.

Private

complainant's

act of

filing a

Motion

to Recuse

seeking

to

inhibit a

non-negotiable

judge

of

publicly

known

independence

and

probity

Page

I

of6



/\

\-/

not

only

in

the

instant

case

but

in

all other

cases is

already

a

habit.

Proscribed

forum

shopping is

their

cup

of

tea;

3.

The

official counsel of

the

private

complainantnot

only

in the

instant

case

but in

all other cases

is

Atty.

Clarence

Villanueva.

A

previous

judge

of

the

Regional Trial

Court

of

Baguio

City

removed for

cause

but

whose

clout

and

influence

to

his

previous

allies and

friends remain;

4.

Recently,

the

accused

in

his

effort

to

interview

potential

witnesses,discovered

the

close

association of

Atty.

Clarence

Villanueva

to

the

presiding

judge

of

this

Honorable

Court.

This

explains

the act

of

Atfy.

Clarence

Villanueva

in

immediately

withdrawing his

appearance

as

counsel

for the

private

complainant

after the

re-raffle

of

the

instant case

to

thisHonorable

Court obviously

to conceal said

close

association.

In

no time,

said

withdrawal

was

granted

by

this Court

in

an

order dated

November,26,

2012;

5.

Without

casting

aspersion

on his

person

and any intention

to

'slight

the dignity

and

respect

due

the

presiding

Judge

of

this

Honorable

Court,

herein

accused

is

of the considered

view

that

his

capacity to try and

decide

the above-entitled

case

fairly

and

judiciously

has

beenobviously

compromised;

6.

The

close

association

of

Atty.

Clarence

Villanueva

to

the

herein

presiding Judge

will

certainly

result

to

acts

favorable

to

the

private

complainantor

acts

with

bias and

prejudice

against

herein accused,

considering

that Atty. Clarence

Villanr-reva

is

stitl the

counsel of

the

private

complainant

in

their

other

cases;

7.

In

fact, the accommodation

by the

Honorable

presiding

Judge

of

the

whims

of the

private

complainant

was

seen

in the

dubious

circumstances

surrounding the

issuance

of

this

honorable

Court's

Order

dated

December

7,

2012,

cancelling

the bail

previously

posted

by

the

accused;

Page

2

of

6



lri

\-./

8.

While

the said Order was

dated

December

07,

2012

(Friday),

it

wasnot

released

by the

Honorable

presiding

Judge on

the

same

day.

The

fact

of

its

non

release

was

confirmed

by

the

liason/secreta4r

of

Atty.

Rarang,

the

co-counsel

of

the

undersigned,

who went

to

the

court

in

the

late

afternoon

of

December

07,

2072

to inquire

about

the

status of

the

complainant's

pending

motions

before the

Court. The

Court

personnel

replied, however,

thatno court

orderhas

yet

been

released nor

any

progress

on

the case

was

given

as of

that morrlent;

9.

On the

following

business

d.y,

December

10,

2012, the

presiding Judge

of

this

Honorable

Court went

to his

office

in

the

morning

but after the

release

of

the

said Order cancelling the

accused's

posted

bail,

he

thereafter

left

the

office

and took

a

leave on the

same

day.

Accused

had

knowledge

of

this because

Atty.

Rarang,

the co-counsel of the undersigned

went

to

the Court

in

the

morning of

December

10, 2AI2

after

several

police

officers

went

to the

premises

of the accused;

10.

It'is

indeed

surprising

that

in

the

early

morning

of

December

70,

2A 12,

police

officers

already

went

to

the

premises

of

the

accused seeking

to

serve the

warrant

of

arrest

already

issued

by

the Honorable

Presicling

Judge.

Indubitable

conclusion

follows

that the

private

complainant

had

a

fullrpriorand

exclusive

knowledge

of

not

only the

issuance

but also the

exact

time of release of

theOrder dated

December

O7,2OL2,

cancelling

the

bond

of

the

accused

and the simultaneous

issuance

of the

warrant

of

arrest;

11. The

case of

Pimentel a,

Salanga,

21

SCRA 760,

asit

lvas

reiterated inGutang

os. Court of

Appeals,

G.R.

No.

12476O,

Julg

B,

7998,

292

SCRA 76, is apropos,

thus:

"All

the

foregoing

nohuithstanding,

this slnutd

be a

good

occaslon

ds

crng

to

drana

attentlon

of

atl

Judges

to

appropriate

guldell.nes

ln a

situation

where

thelr

capacltg

to

try

amd declde a

case

fatrlg

and

Judlctouslg

colmes

to

the

fore

lry

utag

of

challenge

lrom

ang

one

of

the

pantles.

,4

Judge

mag

not

be legatlg

prohtblted

from

sitting

ln a

lttigation. But

when suggestlon ls made

of

record

that

he

might

be induced

to

act ln

fmtor

oJ one

partg

or with

blas

or

prejudiee

against a

Htlgant

arlsing

out

oJ

ctrcumstcl;nce[s]

reasonablg capable

aI

lnclting

such

a state

of

mind.,

he

should conduct

a

eareful

sef,f-

exqmlnatlon.

He should

exerclse

his

d.lscretlon

ln

a

wag

il

";-''

Page

3 of6



*,J

that the

people's

faith

in the

courts

of

justiee

is not

lmpaired-

A

sahrtary

norrn

is

that

he reflect

on

the

probabilitg

that

a

losing

partg might nurlttre

at

the baclc

of

his

mind

the

thought

that the

iudg*

unmeitoriortslg

tilted

the

scales

of

justice

against

him.

That

passion onthe

part

of

a

judge

mag

be

generated.

because

of

serious

charges

of

misconduct against

him

bg a

suitor

or

his

counsel,

if

nat

altogether

remote.

He

is

a

mnn

subiect

to the

frailties

of

other

men.

He

should,

therefore,

exercise

great care

qnd

cauti-on

before

making

up his

mind

to

act or

uithdraut

fram

a surt

where

that

partg

or

counsel

i.s inuolued.

He

could

ln

good

g"o.c,e

inhlbit

htmself

uhere

that case

could

be

heard

bg anotiher

Judge

and

uthere

flo

aptr reetahle

preJudice utould

be

occastoned

to

the

others

tntnlaed

thereln.On

the

result

oJ

hts

declslon

to

slt

or

not

to slt

mag depend

on

a

great

extent

the all

lmpottant

cotlfidence

ln the

lmpartlatltg

oJ

the

Judtctary.

I

after

reflection

he

should

resolae

to

"

aoluntarllg

deslst

from

slttlng

in d

c.rse

uthere

his

mothtes

and

Jalrness

mlght

he

serl.ouslg

tmpugned,

his

actlon

fu

to

be

lnterpreted

rzs

gtatng

meanlng

and

substance

to

the

second

paragrq.Ph of Sectlon

7,

Rule

737.

He

serues

the

co.use

oJ

tlr.e

lo;w

who

forestalls

ntlscrrrrlag

e of

i

ustlce.

"

12.

Obviously,

there

a-re

acts

on the

paft

of

the

presiding

judge

arising

out

of

circumstances

reasonably

capable

of

inciting

a state

of

mind

of

bias

and

partiality

against

the accused.

These

may be brought

about

by

the

presiding Judge's

close

association

with the

private compiainant's

counsel;

13.

Accused

would

like to

defeat

information

received

from

reliable

sources

that

valuable

considerations

are

involved

in

this

case

and

it

is

not

remote

that

the

private

complainant

tried

the

herein

magistrate's

soul.

To

eliminate

the

slightest

doubt

and

for

the

honorable

judge

to

be

freed

from

the

elaborate

anatomy

of

temptation

from corruption,

we

humbly

tleg and

seek

inhibition

in

the

corridors

of

this

Court;

L4.

The basis

of

the

instant

motion

is

apparently

not

"malevolent

disregard

of

a

settled

jurispruderce,

bordering

on

apparent

gf,oss

ignorance

of

the

lanr" as

coined by

the

counsel

for the private compiainant

in their

Motion

to

Recuse,

because

we

believe

that

those

a-re

words

unbefitting

an

officer

of

the

Court

and

more

importantly,

words

which

are

unacceptable

to

be

addressed

to

any

presiding magistrate

of

any

court-

Page

4

of

6



O*

i

ii

,;

PRAYER

WHREFORE,

premises considered,

respondents

most

respectfuily

prays

of

this

Honorable

Office:

1. TO

ISSUE

AN

ORDER

OF

INTIIBITION

iN

thc

iNStANt

CASC;

2.

To

DEFER

further

proceedings

in

the

instant

casepending

issuance

of

the Order

of

Inhibition.

Respondent

likewise

prays

for

such

other

measures

of

relief

and

remedies

which

are

just

and equitable

under

the

premises.

Makati

City

for

the

CitY

of Baguio.

JUDITH

ZARRAGA

LUIS

LAW

TIRM

Counselfor

Responderrt

7256 J.

Victor St.,

Brry.PiodelPilar,

Te1/Fax

Nps.

82

-4e-oe

/

JUDITH

GA LUIS

P.T.R

NO.

7651BS4Xp

1- 1

1- L3

I

Quezon

City

I.B.P.

Lifetimelltto.

03951

Quezon

City

ROLL

No. 38963

MCLE

Compliance

No.

IV-0018666;

April

26,2013

Tel/Fax

Nos.

822-

49Og

/

468-0012

Notice

of

Hearing

and

Copy

furnished:

TlrE

CLERTI

Or COURT

trffi

l0&3

(

Regional Trial

Coutt

/LloA

Branch

6O

Baguio

City

6-Zo-

l3

Page

5

of

6



$1

OFFICE

OF

THE

COURT ADMINISTRATOR

Supreme Court

of the Philippines

Old Supreme

Court

Bldg

Padre Faura St.

Manila

City

F,W

/0e3'l

/",,04-

6-

Lo-

t3

ATTY.

ALVIN

CARULLO

Counsel

for

the Private Complainant

L6Lg Jollibee

Plaza

Emerald Avenue,

Ortigas

Pasig

City

Greetings:

KR+

/0

s{o

l'1.0A

b-

7o-

13

Please

submit

the

foregoing

Omnibus

Mation fot

tJ;.e

consideration

of

the

Honorable

Courton

June

26,

2073

at

8:3O

o'elack

ln

the

os

the Court's

Calendar

mag

permit.

a.

Thank

you.

;ruDITII

Z.

LUIS

EXPLAI{ATION

The

foregoing

tlrgent

Omnibus

Motioriltas been

filed and

served

by

registered

mail

due

to distance,

time

constraints,

unpredictable

traffic

situat4dfr-and

lack

of

available

messenger

to

personally file and

serve

the

same.

Z. LUIS

Page

6 of6



+'

fi.

REPI.tsUC

OF

TI{E

PHIUPPIHES

REGIOITIAL

IRI.,AL

COURT

FIRST

JUDICI,AL

REGION

BftAt'ICH

60

BAGT'IO

CTTY

T}IE

PE{PI"E

SF

THE

PHILIPPINES,

Flainffi

-

Versus

-

ATTY.

ERNE$TQ

OELSS

SANTOS,

Accused.

X---------"

----X

Crim,

Cgse

No. 323ff6-R

for:

Qualifi€d

Thefr

?R

Q-H

N

&t

todat's

p

*l

cen{crenceo

the

Court

notes

the

appearernce

of

a

privah

protecutor,

for

which,rftason,

tht

parties

are

dlreeM

to subrnit

thcir

respstive

prr-trial

briefe, ae

nryll

gs

th*

r*spuive

"ludcigl

S#ldavieg

sf

th$.ir

witnprrcs

whkh

shail

bc

fumishd

to

each

other

withh

fiv€

(5)

days before

flre actral prc-g,ial.

This

period

shal

h

strict{y

observed

by

H,re

pa* es.

,i

,

i

,i,,,,

r

---

--

-'--

,r

..,,1,.

W}{EREFORE,

Sle

pre-hial

corrfer*nea

tday

is

hereby

cancelH

ryrd

rEget

to

June

25, 2013

at

8:30

o'clock

in

he

moming.

The

parfics

ar€

dirocted

to

submft

thdr

reepactirie

pre-tri{l

brhf$

attadring

theraruith

tfuc

ludfg$

Affi&vib

of

their

wifrresseq,

which

pre-1gial

briefs

and

Judicial

Affidav$ts

shall be tumished

to

each oth+r

at

lmst five

(S),dil6

hdpro

thr

aforestated

d&

ef

pre-lrfl

eenfErerrce,

50

ORDEREB,

ffiSIE

IH

OPEF{

C*URT.

this

ts4e day of

AFdl,

m[],

*t

fi*guio:,City,

fh$ippirm,

.:a

"?IIIIEAI

8IGflg}

EDX

I.BCR:FO

T" dTARAYALL

Fr#idirqg

lrdge

b

U

APR

B'$lil

ETClsmw

urgent omnibus motion jun 21 2013

Documents