G.R. No. 229781. October 10, 2017

'''G.R. No. 229781. October 10, 2017''' is a decision 2017 made by the Supreme Court. De Lima

Case Details

 * Senator Leila M. De Lima Vs. Hon. Juanita Guerrero, et al.
 * G.R. No. 229781. October 10, 2017
 * Justice Presbitero Velasco, Jr.
 * http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/october2017/229781.pdf
 * Dissenting Opinion
 * Maria Lourdes Sereno
 * Antionio Carpio
 * Marvic Leonen
 * Francis Jardeleza
 * Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa
 * Concurring Opinion
 * Teresita Leonardo-De Castro
 * Samuel Martires
 * Separate Opinion
 * Diosdado Peralta
 * Separate Concurring Opinion
 * Mariano Del Castillo
 * Noel Tijam
 * Separate Concurring and Dissenting Opinion
 * Estela Perlas-Bernabe
 * Writ of Preliminary Injunction, Temporary Restraining Order and Status Quo Ante Order

Issue
From the pleadings and as delineated in this Court's Advisory dated March 10, 2017 and discussed by the parties during the oral arguments, the issues for resolution by this Court are:

Procedural Issues: Substantive Issues:
 * 1) Whether or not petitioner is excused from compliance with the doctrine on hierarchy of courts considering that the petition should first be filed with the Court of Appeals.
 * 2) Whether or not the pendency of the Motion to Quash the Information before the trial court renders the instant petition premature.
 * 3) Whether or not petitioner, in filing the present petition, violated the rule against forum shopping given the pendency of the Motion to Quash the Information before the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City in Criminal Case No. 17-165 and the Petition for Certiorari filed before the Court of Appeals in C.A. G.R. SP No. 149097, assailing the preliminary investigation conducted by the DOJ Panel.
 * 1) Whether the Regional Trial Court or the Sandiganbayan has the jurisdiction over the violation of Republic Act No. 9165 averred in the assailed Information.
 * 2) Whether or not the respondent gravely abused her discretion in finding probable cause to issue the Warrant of Arrest against petitioner.
 * 3) Whether or not petitioner is entitled to a Temporary Restraining Order and/or Status Quo Ante Order in the interim until the instant petition is resolved or until the trial court rules on the Motion to Quash.

Info
"Thus, probable cause can be established with hearsay evidence, as long as there is substantial basis for crediting the hearsay. Hearsay evidence is admissible in determining probable cause in a preliminary investigation because such investigation is merely preliminary, and does not finally adjudicate rights and obligations of parties."

Decision
WHEREFORE, the instant petition for prohibition and certiorari is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City, Branch 204 is ordered to proceed with dispatch with Criminal Case No. 17-165.

Triva

 * Special Decision