ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 142458. June 14, 2000]

LOLITA H. ESPARCIA vs. P/S INSP. RESTITO GATERA

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUN 14 2000.

G.R. No. 142458 (Lolita H. Esparcia vs. P/S Insp. Restito Gatera, et al.)

Petitioner filed a criminal complaint against respondents, among whom are police officers of Davao City, for violation of republic Act No. 7438 for allegedly depriving her of her right to counsel when she was arrested on December 4, 1997. An information was filed with the Municipal trial Court in Cities, Branch 7, Davao City. Upon respondents' motion for reinvestigation, the criminal complaint was dismissed on the ground that R.A. 7438 applies only to persons under custodial interrogation, and not to petitioner herein who was arrested by virtue of a warrant. After petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied, she appealed to the Regional State Prosecutor, Region XI who directed the Prosecution Office of Davao City to file the Proper Information. However, respondent policemen, filed a motion for reconsideration which was granted, thus affirming the findings of the reinvestigating prosecutor calling for the dismissal of petitioner's complaint.

Petitioner brought the instant petition for certiorari under Rule 65 directly to this Court, alleging that there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy available in the ordinary course of law.

While a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 may be the remedy, the same should have been filed with the court of Appeals (Dee v. Court of Appeals, 238 SCRA 254 [1994]). Consequently, and in order to respect the hierarchy of courts, the petition must be dismissed.

ACCORDINGLY, the petition is DISMISSED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE