Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila

FIRST DIVISION

MONICO O. PUENTEVELLA,
Petitioner,
SC-GR No. 210696
-versus-

OFFICE OF THEOMBUDSMAN,
ET AL.,
Respondents.
x - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

COMPLIANCE

ATTY. HOWARD M. CALLEJAof Calleja Law Office, by counsel

and unto this Honorable Court, respectfully avers:

1. On 7 April 2016, the Calleja Law Office received its copy of

this Honorable Court’s Resolution of 24 February 2016 informing it, among
other things, of the dismissal of the Petition for Certiorari in this case for
failure of the petitioner to sufficiently show that the Ombudsman committed
grave abuse of discretion when it issued the challenged judgments.

2. Incidentally, this Honorable Court, in the aforementioned

Resolution, required of Atty. Howard M. Calleja to SHOW CAUSE within
ten (10) days from receipt of the aforementioned Resolution why he should
not be disciplinarily dealt with or held in contempt of court, together with
Atty. Ralph A. Sarmiento, who has not withdrew as counsel for petitioner
insofar as Atty. Calleja has reason to believe based on his knowledge and
information, in relation to a purportedly altered Motion to Transfer Hearing
that was attached as Annex F to the instant Petition for Certiorari filed on 27
January 2014.Hence, this compliance which is being timely filed.

3. Record of this case would readily disclose that Atty. Calleja

filed with the Honorable Supreme Court on 6 November 2015 his Entry of
Appearance as counsel for petitioner Puentevella in this case, which was
thereafter forwarded to the Honorable First Division on 11 November 2015.

4. Further note should be duly taken by this Honorable Court of

the fact that the Petition for Certiorari (with Application for Preliminary
Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order) docketed as G.R. No. 210696
 2

was filed by Atty. Ralph A. Sarmiento (Sarmiento) on 27 January 2014,

while the now questioned Annex F thereof, which is the Motion to Transfer
Hearing dated 24 November 2009 filed before the Office of the Deputy
Ombudsman for the Visayas (OMB-Visayas) in the case docketed as OMB-
V-C-07-0134-D1 was filed by Atty. Adelaida R. Rendon (Rendon) sometime
on 24 November 2009, who was then representing petitioner Puentevella as
respondent therein during the preliminary investigation being conducted by
the OMB-Visayas.

5. Given the circumstances surrounding this case, insofar as the

preparation and filing of the Petition for Certiorari before the Honorable
Supreme Court on 27 January 2014, the attachment of the questioned
Motion to Transfer Hearing dated 24 November 2009 as Annex F to said
Petition, and the preparation and filing of the aforementioned Motion, Atty.
Calleja respectfully submits, as he likewise begs the indulgence of this
Honorable Court, that he had no participation whatsoever as regards such
prior matters since he only became counsel of petitioner when the case was
elevated to the Supreme Court and after more than a year had passed since
the filing thereof. To reiterate, the Petition for Certiorari was filed on 27
January 2015 and was apparently prepared for petitioner Puentevella by
Atty. Sarmiento while the questioned Annex F, which is the Motion to
Transfer Hearing filed before OMB-Visayas was prepared for petitioner
Puentevella by Atty. Rendon and was filed way back in 24 November 2009.

6. Atty. Calleja cannot be reasonably expected to know whether

the questioned Annex F was altered or not given that he only entered his
appearance as counsel for petitioner Puentevella on 6 November 2015. He
was in no way involved in the case of petitioner Puentevella from its
inception during the proceedings before the OMB-Visayas up to the time the
Petition for Certiorari was filed before the Honorable Supreme Court.
Moreover, as a fellow officer of the court, he relied in good faith with the
representations made by Attys. Sarmiento and Rendon for which he should
not be faulted at all.

7. Moreover, Atty. Calleja respectfully maintains that he had not

violated Rules 10.01, 10.02 and 10.03 of Canon 10, Code of Professional
Responsibility (CPR). He respectfully submits that he had faithfully and
conscientiously performed his duties, both as counsel for petitioner
Puentevella and as an officer of the court. Relative thereto, Atty. Calleja
humbly posits the following:

a.) He has not committed any falsehood nor had he consented to

the doing of the same, much more mislead this Honorable
Court or allow It to be misled by any artifice, as provided in
Rule 10.01, Canon 10, CPR, as he was not involved in the
preparation and filing of the subject Petition for Certiorari
1
The case is entitled “Joselito T. Bayatan vs. Monico O. Puentevella, et al.”, which later became the subject
of the instant Petition for Certiorari docketed as G.R. No. 21096.
 3

and the attachment of the questioned Motion as Annex F

thereto;

b.) He has not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents

of the subject Petition or the questioned Motion, as provided
in Rule 10.02, Canon 10, CPR, as he was not the author of
either pleading or paper; and finally

c.) In keeping with the clear mandate of Rule 10.03, Canon 10,
CPR, he has, at all times, observed the rules of procedure
and has not misused them to defeat the ends of justice as he
had been conscientious in his dealings with his client,
petitioner Puentevella, with his fellow lawyers, and most
important of all, with this Honorable Court.

8. Atty. Calleja has not been remiss or negligent in discharging his

twin duties to his client and to the courts, yet he would nonetheless beg the
understanding and leniency of this Honorable Court for any honest lapses for
which he may be reasonably held accountable for, but not for the purported
alterations on the questioned Motion in the off-chance that indeed it was
altered.

RELIEF

WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, Atty. Howard M. Calleja,

counsel for petitioner Monico O. Puentevella, respectfully prays that this
Honorable Court:

1. NOTE this Compliance;

2. CONSIDER as having SUFFICIENTLY EXPLAINED his

involvement as regards the issue on the purported altered
Motion to Transfer Hearing that was attached as Annex F to the
Petition for Certiorari filed on 27 January 2014; and

3. RENDER a Resolution declaring Atty. Howard M. Calleja

without any liability in the matter/issue at hand.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.

Pasig City for Manila City. 17 April 2016.

 4

By:

Copy furnished:

OFFICE OF LEGAL AFFAIRS

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
National Government Center
Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City

SANDIGANBAYAN
Centennial Building
Commonwealth Ave., Quezon City

EXPLANATION

Due to distance, time constraints, and sufficient manpower, personal

filing and service of this Compliance was not resorted to and instead copies
of the same were sent by registered mail with attached registry receipts.

ALFREDO L. BENTULAN JR.