HEIDE M. ESTANDARTE vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. Nos. 156851-55
February February 18, 2008
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.:
FACTS:
Petitioner was the school principal o the Ra!on "orres National #i$h %chool &R"N#%' in (a$o )ity, Ne$ros *cci+ental. %o!eti!e in 18, a $roup o concerne+ R"N#% teachers &priate co!plainants', sent an un+ate+ letter to the the %chool hools s ii iis sion ion o (a$o a$o )ity )ity &%c &%chool hools s ii iis sion'5 on'5 attachin$ a list o 15 irre$ularities alle$e+ly co!!itte+ by the petitioner, which the priate co!plainants re/ueste+ to be inesti inesti$at $ate+. e+. "wo co!pla co!plaint ints s were were eentual eentually ly le+ le+ by priate co!plainants a$ainst petitioner with the *ce o the *!bu+s!an-isayas.
"he *!bu+s!an-isayas *!bu+s!an-isayas orwar+e+ the co!plaint +oc3ete+ as *4(-%-)ri!--10 to the *ce o the )ity Prosecutor o (a$o )ity or preli!inary inesti$ation, instea+ o lin$ a counter-a+ait, petitioner le+ beore the )ity Pros Prosec ecuto utorr a 4oti 4otion on or or (i (ill ll o Partic articula ulars rs with with 4oti 4otion on or 7tension o "i!e to File )ounter-9+ait. n the 4otion or (ill (i ll o Partic articul ulars ars,, peti petiti tion oner er alle alle$e $e+ + that that ther there e were were no specic cri!inal char$es that were state+ in the subpoenas. "hus, petitioner insiste+ that she cannot intelli$ently prepare her counter counter-a -a+a +ait it unless unless the cri!in cri!inal al char$es char$es an+ the laws she iolate+ are specie+.
*n 4arch 10, 2000, the )ity Prosecutor issue+ an *r+er attachin$ the priate co!plainants: (ill o Particulars, an+ +irectin$ the petitioner to le her counter-a+ait.1 Petitioner le+ her counter-a+ait li!itin$ hersel only to the char$es specie+ in the (ill o Particulars.
ISSUE:
;hether or not the *!bu+s!an can be bin+ by the (ill o Particulars HELD:
No. "he *!bu+s!an cannot be boun+ by the (ill o Particulars sub!itte+ by priate co!plainants. "he )ourt a$rees with the *%G. )learly, the act o the prosecutor in $rantin$ the petitioner:s 4otion or (ill o Particulars is an act contrary to the epress !an+ate o 9.*. No. <, to wit= No !otion to +is!iss shall be allowe+ ecept or lac3 o >uris+iction. Neither !ay a !otion or a bill o particulars be entertaine+. the respon+ent +esires any !atter in the co!plainant:s a+ait to be clarie+, the particulari?ation thereo !ay be +one at the ti!e o claricatory /uestionin$ in the !anner proi+e+ in para$raph &' o this section. )onse/uently, in the present case, petitioner has no ali+ basis or insistin$ that the *!bu+s!an-isayas !ust be boun+ by the erroneous act o the )ity Prosecutor in $rantin$ petitioner:s 4otion or (ill o Particulars. @aws an+ >urispru+ence $rant the *ce o the *!bu+s!an the authority to reerse or nulliy the acts o the prosecutor
pursuant to its power o control an+ superision oer +eputi?e+ prosecutors. #ence, it was within the prero$atie o the *!bu+s!an-isayas not to consi+er the (ill o Particulars sub!itte+ by the priate co!plainants.
DISPOSITION:
;#7R7F*R7, the petition is P9R"9@@A GR9N"7. "he assaile+ *r+ers +ate+ %epte!ber 2, 2002 an+ ece!ber 20, 2002 o the Re$ional "rial )ourt o (a$o )ity, (ranch 62 are %7" 9%7. "he case is re!an+e+ to the trial court or +eter!ination whether petitioner was +enie+ +ue process in the con+uct o the preli!inary inesti$ation.
%* *R7R7.
