July 1981 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1981 > July 1981 Decisions > [A.M. No. 2040-MJ : July 31, 1981.] ALEJANDRA G. LEGASPI, Complainant, vs. HON. GIDEON DE PEDRO, Circuit Municipal Judge of Ibajay-Nabas, Ibajay, Aklan, Respondent.:




FIRST DIVISION

[A.M. No. 2040-MJ : July 31, 1981.]

ALEJANDRA G. LEGASPI, Complainant, vs. HON. GIDEON DE PEDRO, Circuit Municipal Judge of Ibajay-Nabas, Ibajay, Aklan, Respondent.

 

D E C I S I O N

 

FERNANDEZ, J.:

 

In a sworn-complaint dated October 21, 1978, Alejandra G. Legaspi charged Judge Gideon De Pedro, Circuit Municipal Judge of Ibajay-Nabas, Ibajay, Aklan with oppression, grave misconduct, abuse of authority and ignorance of the law in ordering the detention of the complainant for twenty-two cranad(22) hours without proper proceedings and in violation of law.1

The affidavit of the complainant attached to the complaint as Annex “A”2 alleged that on August 8, 1978, at about 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon, Deputy Provincial Sheriff Ramon Tejada, together with two cranad(2) policemen, Fernando Amacio and Alejandro Sim, and Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte arrived at the house of the complainant in Laguinbanwa, Ibajay, Aklan; that upon arrival of the above-named persons, Deputy Provincial Sheriff Ramon Tejada requested the complainant to receive a copy of the writ of execution, but the complainant refused to receive the same, and so the Deputy Provincial Sheriff said that he would leave her the copy thereof; that the complainant told the Deputy Provincial Sheriff that she would not accept the copy of the writ of execution because her lawyer had filed a motion for reconsideration, and as a matter of fact, the Municipal Circuit Court of Ibajay-Nabas, Ibajay, Aklan had given the other party ten cranad(10) days to file an opposition to the said motion for reconsideration; that the complainant further informed the Deputy Sheriff that they better wait first for the resolution of the said motion for reconsideration; that Deputy Provincial Sheriff, Ramon Tejada, told the complainant that he was delivering the possession of the land to Libertad Estandarte; that the complainant said that she could not agree because of her motion for reconsideration; that the Deputy Provincial Sheriff asked the opinion of the two cranad(2) policemen but the latter replied that they were there simply to preserve peace and order; that Patrolman Fernando Amacio offered the advice to Deputy Sheriff Ramon Tejada that it would perhaps be better to wait for ten cranad(10) days for the resolution of the motion for reconsideration; that after the complainant refused anew to accept a copy of the writ of execution, Deputy Sheriff Ramon Tejada, the two cranad(2) policemen, and the spouses Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte left the place; that after a while at about past 4:30 o’clock in the afternoon of the same date, two cranad(2) policemen again arrived at the house; that the two cranad(2) policemen told the complainant that Judge De Pedro wanted to talk to her about the motion for reconsideration and urged the complainant to hurry, otherwise, said judge would arrest her; that the complainant went with the two cranad(2) policemen, and when they arrived at the Municipal Building of Ibajay, Aklan, she saw Judge De Pedro at the corridor of the building talking to Deputy Provincial Sheriff Ramon Tejada, Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte, so the complainant proceeded to the Office of said Judge De Pedro; that after about five cranad(5) minutes, Judge De Pedro, together with the spouses Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte, entered the office and told the complainant to receive the writ of execution and to comply with it; that the complainant informed Judge De Pedro that she could not receive the writ of execution, much less comply with it, because of her motion for reconsideration and the fact that Judge De Pedro even gave the other party ten cranad(10) days to comment on said motion; that Judge De Pedro told the complainant that her motion for reconsideration referred to damages claimed against the spouses Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte, and does not concern the writ of execution; that Judge De Pedro also told the complainant that she better promise to vacate the land where she was staying, otherwise, the judge would put her in jail; that Judge De Pedro gave the complainant ten cranad(10) minutes to think over the matter; that after ten cranad(10) minutes, the complainant told Judge De Pedro that she could not change her stand; that after hearing her answer, Judge De Pedro left so the complainant decided also to leave, but Patrolmen Francisco and Montaño prevented her to leave the Municipal Building of Ibajay, Aklan; that Patrolman Francisco sent Patrolman Montaño to Judge De Pedro who was already on his way home to ask him what they should do to the complainant; that upon the return of Patrolman Montaño, he informed the complainant that Judge De Pedro had ordered her detention; and that the complainant was detained in the Municipal Building of Ibajay, Aklan that very day and was released at 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon of the following day, August 9, 1978.

In his comment contained in a 2nd Indorsement dated December 7, 1978, 3 the respondent Judge De Pedro denied the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the complaint that he had committed oppression, grave misconduct, abuse of authority and ignorance of the law and alleged that a Special Civil Action No. 2732 for Certiorari with preliminary injunction had been filed on August 14, 1978 in the Court of First Instance of Aklan by the complainant against the respondent judge, the Deputy Provincial Sheriff, Ramon Tejada of the Court of First Instance of Aklan, and the private respondents, the spouses Pableo Estandarte and Libertad Estandarte, the winning party-plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 46, based on the same facts contained in the complaint and the supporting affidavit, Annex “A”; that the respondent judge attached to his comment copies of documents showing the events that transpired in Civil Case No. 46; and that the open defiance and belligerent attitude of the complainant to the Court and to the respondent judge, not only on August 8, 1978 but also on prior occasions, had constrained the respondent judge “to apply the last and only weapon of the Court to preserve the dignity of the judiciary and its processes . cra .”

In can be seen from the comment of the respondent judge that he does not deny having ordered the detention of the complainant for 22 hours from August 8 in the afternoon up to August 9, 1978 at 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon. The alleged defiant acts committed by the complainant constituted indirect contempt which cannot be punished summarily. Under Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, indirect contempt can be punished only after a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the accused to be heard by himself or counsel.:onad

The respondent judge erred in punishing the complainant summarily by ordering her detention for about 22 hours without filing a written charge against her and giving her an opportunity to be heard.

The offense of the respondent judge is serious in that he deprived a person of her liberty without due process of law. He should be imposed a fine equivalent to his salary for three cranad(3) months.

WHEREFORE, the respondent Judge is hereby declared guilty of having ordered the detention of the complainant without due process of law and is imposed a fine equivalent to his salary for three cranad(3) months with the warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely.

Let this decision be made a part of the personal record of the respondent judge.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, Guerrero and Melencio-Herrera, JJ., concur.

Teehankee cranad(Chairman), concurs in the result.

 

Endnotes

 1. Rollo, p. 1.

 2. Rollo, pp. 2-3.

 3. Rollo, pp. 5-20.

 




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






July-1981 Jurisprudence                 

  • [A.M. No. 2440-CFI : July 25, 1981.] IGLESIA NI CRISTO, Complainant, vs. JUDGE LEOPOLDO B. GIRONELLA, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ABRA, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. L-27402 : July 25, 1981.] GUARDIANSHIP OF THE INCOMPETENT LEONORA NAVARRO AND THE MINORS ADOLFO YUSON AND OTHERS, ELDEGARDES YUSON DE PUA, Judicial Guardian-Appellant, vs. JUSTINIANO SAN AGUSTIN, Movant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. L-37425 : July 25, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LITO REVOTOC y BELARMINO, SATURNINO DIAZ y RESQUED and FREDDIE DE VERA y SEBASTIAN, Defendants-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. L-49028 : July 25, 1981.] FRANCISCA ALCAIDE, TITO VICERA and IGNACIO PALCON, Petitioners, vs. HONORABLE EUFROCINIO S. DELA MERCED, MUNICIPAL JUDGE PEDRO J. CALLEJO JR. and CESARIO BENEDITO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 49634-36 : July 25, 1981.] BENJAMIN V. GUIANG and NATIVIDAD H. GUIANG; AURELIO B. HIQUIANA and PASTORA O. HIQUIANA, Petitioners, vs. FILOMENO C. KINTANAR and CORAZON B. KINTANAR; CORA ANN B. KINTANAR, CORA LOU B. KINTANAR, FIL ROGER B. KINTANAR, Private Respondents, and Hon. Judge SERGIO APOSTOL, Quezon City Court of First Instance, Branch XVI, Quezon City, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. 49634-36 : July 25, 1981.] BENJAMIN V. GUIANG and NATIVIDAD H. GUIANG; AURELIO B. HIQUIANA and PASTORA O. HIQUIANA, Petitioners, vs. FILOMENO C. KINTANAR and CORAZON B. KINTANAR; CORA ANN B. KINTANAR, CORA LOU B. KINTANAR, FIL ROGER B. KINTANAR, Private Respondents, and Hon. Judge SERGIO APOSTOL, Quezon City Court of First Instance, Branch XVI, Quezon City, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. L-51363 : July 25, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. FEDERICO CUISON Y PRESTOZA, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. L-51785 : July 25, 1981.] THE HONORABLE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL, BRANCH IX, QUEZON CITY, and ELENA ONG ESCUTIN, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and FELIX ONG, Respondents. GAN HENG, Intervenor.

  • [G.R. No. 52488 : July 25, 1981.] ORTIGAS & COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and MAXIMO F. BELMONTE, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-31705 : July 27, 1981.] MARCELO D. MENDIOLA, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, MAXIMO VITUG, PRAGMACIO VITUG, CONCORDIA KABILING and MARIA FAJARDO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-50031-32 : July 27, 1981.] CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, ISIDRO E. FERNANDEZ, and JESUS R. JAYME, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-27331 : July 30, 1981.] ELISEO ALIMPOOS, CIRIACA ALIMPOOS, SGT. MILLARDO M. PATES, PEDRO BACLAY, CATALINO YAMILO, RAFAEL CAPANGPANGAN, DALMACIO YGOT and EUFROCINA ESTORES, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, HONORABLE JUDGE MONTANO A. ORTIZ, REYNALDO MOSQUITO and MATILDE ABASTILLAS MOSQUITO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-28373 : July 30, 1981.] JOSEFINA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband RAMON DE LA RAMA, and LETICIA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband PORFIRIO BLANCAFLOR, Petitioners, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and ANITA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband ROSENDO DE LA RAMA; CAROLINA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband ISIDRO LACSON and MARIA VICTORIA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband EUSEBIO LOPEZ, Respondents. [G.R. No. L-30252 : July 30, 1981.] ANITA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband ROSENDO DE LA RAMA; CAROLINA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband ISIDRO LACSON; and MARIA VICTORIA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband EUSEBIO LOPEZ, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, JOSEFINA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband RAMON DE LA RAMA; and LETICIA RODRIGUEZ, accompanied by her husband PORFIRIO BLANCAFLOR, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-45640 : July 30, 1981.] FELOMINO RAMIREZ and RUSTICO VALDEZ, Petitioners, vs. HON. ILDEFONSO BLEZA, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Oriental Mindoro, HON. ZACARIAS V. GARCIA, Municipal Judge of Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro, PABLO QUIJOL, ABEDIANO GAANAN, and DR. CONSTANCIO BONDAL, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-50065 : July 30, 1981.] PERSHING TAN QUETO, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. CARMELITO, RUFO, HERACLEO and ELENA, all surnamed CANDONGO, and VICENTE CALIMPONG, representing deceased wife, BENITA CANDONGO, Respondents-Appellees.

  • [G.R. No. L-52431 : July 30, 1981.] RODOLFO FARI�AS, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and ANTONIO F. LAZO, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-55398 : July 30, 1981.] REGINA STA. ROMANA VDA. DE ALCANTARA, Petitioner, vs. HONORABLE CORONA IBAY SOMERA in her capacity as Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of La Union cranad(Balaoan), JOAQUIN STA. ROMANA and JOSE DELA PE�A, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-55629 : July 30, 1981.] MAGDALENA RAMO, NARCISO ALBARRACIN, ANTONIO DUMLAO and NORMA RICAFORT, Petitioners, vs. INOCENCIA ELEFA�O and HON. AUXENCIO C. DACUYCUY, in his capacity as Presiding Judge of Branch IV, Court of First Instance of Leyte, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-56028 : July 30, 1981.] NILO A. MALANYAON, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. HON. ESTEBAN M. LISING, as Judge of the CFI of Camarines Sur, Br. VI, and CESARIO GOLETA, as Municipal Treasurer of Bula, Camarines Sur, Respondents-Appellees.

  • [A.M. No. P-1176 : July 31, 1981.] DR. SY TIAN TIN, Complainant, vs. ROLANDO MACAPUGAY, Deputy Sheriff of the Court of First Instance of Malolos, Bulacan, Respondent.

  • [A.C. No. 1377 : July 31, 1981.] DORIS R. RADAZA, Complainant, vs. ROBERTO T. TEJANO, Respondent.

  • [A.M. No. 2040-MJ : July 31, 1981.] ALEJANDRA G. LEGASPI, Complainant, vs. HON. GIDEON DE PEDRO, Circuit Municipal Judge of Ibajay-Nabas, Ibajay, Aklan, Respondent.

  • [A.M. No. P-2108 : July 31, 1981.] BENJAMIN BARRERA, Petitioner, vs. MARTY DESACADA, Respondent.

  • [A.M. No. 2380-CFI : July 31, 1981.] ROMULADO BAYLEN, Complainant, vs. HON. SANCHO INSERTO, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, Branch I, Iloilo City, Respondent.

  • [A.M. No. 2428-CFI : July 31, 1981.] JESUS O. TUAZON, Petitioner, vs. HON. ELVIRO L. PERALTA, Respondent.

  • [G.R. No. L-26274 : July 31, 1981.] ALPHA INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. ESPERANZA C. REYES, ARTURO R. REYES and DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, Defendants-Appellees.

  • [G.R. No. L-30051 : July 31, 1981.] NATIONAL WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY, Petitioner, vs. NATIONAL WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE AUTHORITY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION AND COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, Respondents.

  • [G.R. Nos. L-30722-25 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CONRADO SAN MIGUEL, JESUS BUENAVENTURA, GONZALO PEREZ, ALIPIO PEREZ, RICARDO PEREZ and RAUL MENDOZA, Defendants-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. L-31605 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PANFILO BLAS, Defendant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. L-36162 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PAULITO GARCIA and PABLO CANONIGO, Defendants-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. L-37641 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ANTONIO AGBOT, Defendant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. L-37836 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CLAUDIO BULAONG and FONSO LAURECIO, Accused-Appellants.

  • [G.R. No. L-38652 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CRISTITUTO LARIOSA alias �Totot�, Accused-Appellant.

  • [G.R. No. L-44371 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. VITALIANO CIRIA @ Mano, Defendant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. L-46558 : July 31, 1981.] PHILIPPINE AIR LINES, INC., Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and JESUS V. SAMSON, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-47847 : July 31, 1981.] DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and MANUELA PASTOR, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. 50044 : July 31, 1981.] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ALEJANDRO PEREZ y LANA, Defendant-Appellee.

  • [G.R. No. L-50320 : July 31, 1981.] PHILIPPINE APPAREL WORKERS UNION, Petitioners, vs. THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and PHILIPPINE APPAREL, INC., Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-51218 : July 31, 1981.] MARY DE V. FRAUENDORFF, Petitioner, vs. JUDGE JOSE R. CASTRO, Presiding Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Quezon City Branch IX, ZODIAC PHARMACEUTICAL CO., INC. & SAMTOP INVESTMENT & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • [G.R. No. L-51414 : July 31, 1981.] PAQUITO G. BALASABAS, Petitioner, vs. HON. GREGORIO U. AQUILIZAN, Judge of the Court of Agrarian Relations, Cotabato City, Respondent.