JOSEPH E. ESTRADA v.

ANIANO DESIERTO

G.R. No. 146710-15

Date: 2001-03-02

FACTS:

Estrada then again is currently dealing with his cases of plunder and etc. under
the workplace of the Ombudsman. At that point, he documented a writ of preliminary
order to charge the Ombudsman from "leading any further procedures in or whatever
other criminal protest that might be recorded in his office, until after the term of
applicant as President is finished.”

Through another direction, Estrada also petitioned for Quo Warranto. He

petitioned to affirm himself as the President of the Philippines briefly incapable to take
over the obligations of his office. In this sense, he pronounced Arroyo to hold the Office
of the President just in an acting limit.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the prosecution of Estrada should be enjoined due to prejudicial

publicity.

RULING:

The prosecution of Estrada should not be enjoined due to prejudicial publicity.

RATIO DECIDENDI:

To hold a warrant to rule out prejudicial publicity, there should be claim and
verification that the appointed authorities have been unduly impacted by publicity itself.
In this case, there isn't sufficient proof to warrant this Court to urge the primer
examination of the applicant by the respondent Ombudsman. Estrada needs to offer
more than threatening headlines to release his weight of confirmation.