REYES V CAMILON

REYES v CAMILON (CRIM PRO)
FACTS:
Domingo Reyes, the herein petitioner, was employed as a building Superintended II of the
Bureau of Buildings and Real Property Management in the Municipality of Pasig, Province of
Rizal. Petitioner having the duty of making estimates and supervising projects under the control
and supervision pf the Bureau of Building and Real Property Management, did then and there
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously demand and/or receive the total amount of Php 46,200.00 for
himself and other officials of Bureau of Buildings and Real Property Management as 20% share
and bribe money in connection with the construction projects being undertaken by said Pedro
Domingo, Jr. at the Central Luzon General Hospital under the supervision and control of the
Bureau of Buildings and Real Property Management and in which project, the above-named
accused in his official capacity as Building Superintended II has to intervene under the law.
Thus, a complaint for Violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act was filed by Pedro
Domingo, Jr. against Domingo Reyes before the Office of the Provincial Fiscal, Pasig, Rizal.
While waiting for the filing of simultaneous memoranda, counsel for Reyes sent a letter to
Provincial Fiscal of Pasig, Rizal, requesting that the complainant be ordered to specify the
particular provisions of R.A. 3019 on w/c he based his denuncia against Reyes. Fiscal Baltazar
promulgated a Resolution stating the the requested bill of particulars is no longer necessary as
all evidence for both parties had already been submitted and that based on both oral and
documentary evidence adduced by the parties, sufficient prima facie evidence was established
by Pedro Domingo, Jr. that Reyes committed a violation of Sec. 3, paragraph b, of R.A 3019, as
amended, known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt practices Act.
Reyes filed a Motion to Declare Information Invalid on the ff. grounds 1. The acts for w/c he
stands charged do not constitute a violation of Sec. 3 (b) of R.A. 3019; 2. He has not been
afforded the right of due prelim investigation; 3. The info is defective in form and substance in
that it is violative of Sec. 1, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, the prosecuting fiscal having failed to
include all the public officers who appear to be responsible for committing the offense charged.
The trial court denied Reyes’ motion to declare the info invalid stating Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No.
3019 as amended, (b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share,
percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other party, wherein the public officer in his official
capacity has to intervene under the law. Reyes was likewise ordered suspended effective
immediately from public office pending final determination of the criminal case against him.
Hence, Special civil action for Certiorari and prohibition is the Order of the Court of First
Instance, penned by Judge Camilon, w/c denied Domingo Reyes’ motion to declare the
information invalid thereby sustaining the validity of said info against him.
ISSUE:
W/N Respondent Judge committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of or in excess
of jurisdiction in denying Reyes’ motion to declare the info invalid, and ordering his suspension
from office thereafter effective immediately.
RULING:
The petition is devoid of merit. The remedy of certiorari is limited to acts of any agency or
office exercising judicial functions or of any judge which are claimed to be "without or in
excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion." It does not lie for the
correction of errors of judgment which may be brought about only by appeal. Not every
error in procedure, or every erroneous conclusion of law or of fact of serious nature, is
correctible by certiorari, appeal being the appropriate remedy, except where the error
constitutes grave abuse of discretion, i.e., "such capricious and whimsical exercise of
judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction."
Having found the information filed against Reyes to be valid and sufficient in form and
substance and that preliminary investigation preceded the filing thereof, the trial court
obviously did not commit a grave abuse of discretion in denying Reyes’ motion to
declare the information invalid.

REYES V CAMILON

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REYES V CAMILON

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

REYES V CAMILON

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REYES v CAMILON (CRIM PRO)

You might also like