SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. Nos. 238180-83. March 18, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,vs. SANDIGANBAYAN [SEVENTH DIVISION] AND LEMUEL MEYRICK M. ACOSTA, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 18 March 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. Nos. 238180-83 (People of the Philippines v. Sandiganbayan [Seventh Division] and Lemuel Meyrick M. Acosta)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DISMISS the instant petition 1 for failure of the petitioner People of the Philippines (petitioner) to sufficiently show that the Sandiganbayan (SB) committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in granting respondent Lemuel Meyrick M. Acosta's (respondent) Demurrer to Evidence 2 in its January 10, 2018 3 and February 2, 2018 4 Resolutions.
At the outset, it bears stressing that a grant of demurrer to evidence operates as an acquittal and may be reviewed only through certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. The burden is on the petitioner to clearly demonstrate that the trial court blatantly abused its authority to a point so grave as to deprive it of its very power to dispense justice, 5 which petitioner failed to show. As correctly found by the SB, the petitioner was unable to adduce sufficient evidence 6 to prove the third element under Section 3 (h) of Republic Act No. 3019, 7 or the "actual intervention by a public official in a transaction in which he has a financial or pecuniary interest." 8 It is clear from the records that respondent, as vice-mayor, did not take part in the selection of suppliers for procurement in his official capacity. 9 Therefore, he could not have intervened or participated in the purchase of vehicle parts from H&Y General Merchandise. Thus, the grant of demurrer in this case was proper.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:TERESA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 6-35.
2. Dated November 29, 2017; id. at 117-129.
3.Id. at 45-60. Penned by Associate Justice Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta with Associate Justices Zaldy V. Trespeses and Bayani H. Jacinto, concurring.
4.Id. at 62-66.
5.People v. Atienza, 688 Phil. 122, 135 (2012).
6. See rollo, p. 57.
7. Otherwise known as the "ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT" (August 17, 1960).
8.Domingo v. SB, 510 Phil. 691, 706 (2005), citing Trieste, Sr. v. SB, 229 Phil. 505, 516 (1986).
9. See rollo, p. 57.