ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[OCA-IPI No. 04-1653-MTJ.� August 1, 2005]

DIEGO vs. CALDONA

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 1 2005.

OCA-IPI No. 04-1653-MTJ (Eduardo P. Diego vs. Judge Edgardo M. Caldona, MTCC, Branch 2, Dagupan City.)

For consideration is the administrative complaint dated 22 November 2004 filed by Eduardo P. Diego (Diego) against Judge Edgardo M. Caldona (Judge Caldona), in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the MTCC, Branch 2 of Dagupan City. The charges are Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment and/or Gross Ignorance of the Law relative to Criminal Case No. 38893, entitled "People of the Philippines v. Lucena Escoto, for Falsification of Public Document."

Diego is the private complainant in the above-entitled criminal case. He claims that the accused therein, Lucena Escoto (Escoto) committed the crime of falsification of public document when she adopted and used a new name, "Lucena Escoto" as opposed to her real name, Cresencia Escoto, in her second marriage to his brother, Manuel P. Diego. Escoto likewise stated in her second marriage that she was single when she had in fact acquired a divorce from her first husband. She also indicated in her second marriage that her parents were Norberto Escoto and Clara Ineguez when in her first marriage, her parents were listed as Roberto Escoto and Clarita Enriquez.

According to Diego, Judge Caldona gave credence to the defense of good faith and acquitted Escoto despite the fact that the prosecution was able to present sufficient evidence to prove falsification. Such judgment of Judge Caldona, Diego claims, amounted to knowingly rendering an unjust judgment, if not gross ignorance of the law.

After study and evaluation, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended the dismissal of the complaint. The OCA stated that the appreciation and evaluation of evidence adduced during trial are judicial acts. The Court has consistently ruled that an administrative complaint is not the appropriate remedy for every act of a judge deemed aberrant or irregular where a judicial remedy exists and is available. If subsequent developments prove the judge's challenged act to be correct, there would be no occasion to proceed against him at all. The OCA likewise stated that it is only after the available remedies have been exhausted and the appellate tribunals have spoken with finality that the door to an inquiry into the judge's criminal, civil or administrative liability may be said to have opened or closed. The OCA held that in the absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a judge in his official capacity are not subject to disciplinary action even if such acts are erroneous. No fraud, dishonesty or corruption was proven by Diego in this case, hence the complaint should be dismissed for lack of merit.

Finding the recommendation to be in accord with the law and the facts of the case on record, the same is APPROVED. The administrative complaint against Judge Edgardo M. Caldona in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the MTCC, Branch 2, of Dagupan City is DISMISSED for lack of merit.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUDlCHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE