Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CA
G.R. No. 169711; February 8, 2010
Chapter 4: Preliminary Investigation
Matters on a) Bail, b) Hearing, c) OSG intervention
FACTS:
5. RTC of Manila granted bail for Co on the ground that the evidence of guilt of
respondent Co was not strong. Among the reasons:
First: The extrajudicial confessions of Aman and Martin, apart from
having been irregularly executed, merely proved their participation in the
killing. Neither, however, claimed conspiracy with respondent Co.
Second: Davids narrations were contradictory, uncorroborated, and self-
serving, thus lacking in evidentiary weight.
Third: Police officer Vasquezs story was likewise uncorroborated.
Fourth: The prosecution failed to prove that the offer of settlement came
from Co.
6. Petitioner heirs of Sarah Burgos moved for reconsideration, this was denied.
7. Petitioner heirs of Sarah Burgos then filed for special civil action of certiorari
questioning the RTCs grant of bail to Co, with prayer for temporary
restraining order before the CA. The CA dismissed this.
CA dismissed the petition because it was filed without involving the
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), in violation of jurisprudence and
Section 35, Chapter 12, Title III, Book IV of the Administrative Code:
Sec. 35. Powers and Functions. The Office of the Solicitor General
shall (1) Represent the Government in the Supreme Court and the Court
of Appeals in all criminal proceedings; represent the Government and its
officers in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and all other courts or
tribunals in all civil actions
ISSUE: W/N CA correctly dismissed the special civil action of certiorari for having been
filed in the name of the offended parties and without the OSGs intervention
HELD: YES.
As a general rule, the mandate or authority to represent the state lies only in the
OSG. Actions essentially involving the interest of the State, if not initiated by the
Solicitor General are, as a rule, summarily dismissed. In this case, the question of
granting bail to Co is but an aspect of the criminal action. The grant of bail or its denial
has no impact on the civil liability of Co that depends on conviction by final judgment.
Co has already been arraigned. Trial and judgment, with award for civil liability when
warranted, could proceed even in his absence. In one case cited (Narciso v. Sta. Romana-
Cruz), the SC allowed a party to challenge the trial courts order granting bail only
because the trial court gravely abused its discretion when it granted bail without
conducting any hearing at all. In this case however, the trial court took time to hear
the parade of witnesses that the prosecution presented before reaching the
conclusion that the evidence of guilt of respondent Co was not strong.