This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2013-03-20 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| A public prosecutor alone determines the sufficiency of evidence that establishes the probable cause justifying the filing of a criminal information against the respondent because the determination of existence of a probable cause is the function of the public prosecutor.[21] Generally, the public prosecutor is afforded a wide latitude of discretion in the conduct of a preliminary investigation. Consequently, it is a sound judicial policy to refrain from interfering in the conduct of preliminary investigations, and to just leave to the Department of Justice the ample latitude of discretion in the determination of what constitutes sufficient evidence to establish probable cause for the prosecution of supposed offenders. Consistent with this policy, courts do not reverse the Secretary of Justice's findings and conclusions on the matter of probable cause except in clear cases of grave abuse of discretion.[22] By way of exception, however, judicial review is permitted where the respondent in the preliminary investigation clearly establishes that the public prosecutor committed grave abuse of discretion, that is, when the public prosecutor has exercised his discretion in an arbitrary, capricious, whimsical or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, patent and gross enough as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law.[23] Moreover, the trial court may ultimately resolve the existence or non-existence of probable cause by examining the records of the preliminary investigation when necessary for the orderly administration of justice.[24] Although policy considerations call for the widest latitude of deference to the public prosecutor's findings, the courts should never shirk from exercising their power, when the circumstances warrant, to determine whether the public prosecutor's findings are supported by the facts, and by the law.[25] | |||||
|
2011-05-30 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| The Court considers it sound judicial policy to refrain from interfering in the conduct of preliminary investigations and to leave the Department of Justice ample latitude of discretion in the determination of what constitutes sufficient evidence to establish probable cause for the prosecution of supposed offenders.[33] Its duty in an appropriate case is confined to the issue of whether the executive or judicial determination, as the case may be, of probable cause was done without or in excess of jurisdiction or with abuse of discretion amounting to want of jurisdiction.[34] | |||||
|
2011-05-30 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| We need not over-emphasize that in a preliminary investigation, the public prosecutor merely determines whether there is probable cause or sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime has been committed, and that the respondent is probably guilty thereof and should be held for trial.[40] In a preliminary investigation, a full and exhaustive presentation of the parties' evidence is not required, but only such as may engender a well-grounded belief that an offense has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof. Certainly, it does not involve the determination of whether or not there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt pointing to the guilt of the person. Only prima facie evidence is required; or that which is, on its face, good and sufficient to establish a given fact, or the group or chain of facts constituting the party's claim or defense; and which, if not rebutted or contradicted, will remain sufficient. Therefore, matters of evidence, such as who are the conspirators, are more appropriately presented and heard during the trial.[41] | |||||
|
2010-11-24 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| However, this Court may ultimately resolve the existence or non-existence of probable cause by examining the records of the preliminary investigation when necessary for the orderly administration of justice,[42] or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions.[43] | |||||