Scribd
Upload
131 views1 page

Cerezo Vs People 650 SCRA 222 Facts

This case discusses whether a trial court must make an independent evaluation of a case when ruling on a motion to dismiss or withdraw charges. The prosecutor initially found probable cause and filed charges against respondents for libel, but later recommended withdrawing the charges. The trial court dismissed the case based solely on the prosecutor's recommendation. Upon petitioner's motion, the trial court reinstated the case after the DOJ Secretary reversed the prosecutor. The Supreme Court held that once a case is filed, the court must independently assess any motion to dismiss or withdraw charges based on its own evaluation of the merits, rather than solely relying on the prosecutor or DOJ Secretary. Failing to conduct an independent evaluation violates due process.

Uploaded by

mhickey babon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
131 views1 page

Cerezo Vs People 650 SCRA 222 Facts

This case discusses whether a trial court must make an independent evaluation of a case when ruling on a motion to dismiss or withdraw charges. The prosecutor initially found probable cause and filed charges against respondents for libel, but later recommended withdrawing the charges. The trial court dismissed the case based solely on the prosecutor's recommendation. Upon petitioner's motion, the trial court reinstated the case after the DOJ Secretary reversed the prosecutor. The Supreme Court held that once a case is filed, the court must independently assess any motion to dismiss or withdraw charges based on its own evaluation of the merits, rather than solely relying on the prosecutor or DOJ Secretary. Failing to conduct an independent evaluation violates due process.

Uploaded by

mhickey babon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Cerezo vs People

650 SCRA 222

Facts:
Petitioner filed a complaint for libel against respondents.
Finding probable cause, the Prosecutor filed the corresponding
Information against them, but reversed its earlier finding and
recommended the withdrawal of the Information.
Relying on the recommendation o f the prosecutor, the RTC ordered
the criminal case dismissed on the ground that it is a settled
rule that the determination of the persons to be prosecuted rests
primarily with the Public Prosecutor who is vested with quasi-
judicial discretion in the discharge of this function. Being
vested with such power, he can reconsider his own resolution if
he finds that there is reasonable ground to do so.
However, upon petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, the RTC
granted the same and reinstated the case after the DOJ Secretary
reversed the resolution of the prosecutor.
Issue:
Whether or not the RTC judge necessarily has to make an
independent evaluation or assessment of the merits of the case.

Held:
Yes. Well-entrenched is the rule that once a case is filed with
the court, any disposition of it rests on the sound discretion of
the court. In thus resolving a motion to dismiss a case or to
withdraw an Information, the trial court should not rely solely
and merely on the findings of the public prosecutor or the
Secretary of Justice. It is the court’s bounden duty to assess
independently the merits of the motion, and this assessment must
be embodied in a written order disposing of the motion. While the
recommendation of the prosecutor or the ruling of the DOJ
Secretary is persuasive, it is not binding on courts.
By relying solely on the manifestation of the public prosecutor
and the resolution of the DOJ Secretary, the trial court
abdicated its judicial power and refused to perform a positive
duty enjoined by law.  The said Orders were thus stained with
grave abuse of discretion and violated the complainant’s right to
due process. They were void, had no legal standing, and produced
no effect whatsoever

You might also like