FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 238244. July 9, 2018.]
MICHAEL JOHN POPOVICH, petitioner, vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJuly 9, 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 238244 (Michael John Popovich v. People of the Philippines). — The petitioner's verified manifestation with urgent motion for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period. HEITAD
After review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the petition outright for being the wrong remedy under the law and for violating the doctrine of hierarchy of courts. A motion to allow accused for plea bargaining to plead guilty to a lesser offense is an interlocutory order. Under Section 1, Rule 14 of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, an interlocutory order is not appealable. Hence, it may only be assailed by certiorari or prohibition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court only when it is shown that the trial court acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion. 1 Moreover, the certiorari or prohibition should be filed with the Court of Appeals (CA) in observance of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts. Although this Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the CA in issuing the writ of certiorari, direct resort is allowed only when there are special, extraordinary or compelling reasons that justify the same. This Court enforces the observance of the hierarchy of courts in order to free itself from unnecessary, frivolous and impertinent cases and thus afford time for it to deal with the more fundamental and more essential tasks that the Constitution has assigned to it. There being no special, important or compelling reason, the petitioner thereby violated the observance of the hierarchy of courts, warranting the dismissal of the present petition. 2
Likewise, it is well-settled that the acceptance of an offer to plead guilty is not a demandable right. Under Section 2, Rule 116 of the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the grant of a plea bargain depends on the consent of the offended party and the prosecutor, which is a condition precedent to a valid plea of guilty to a lesser offense that is necessarily included in the offense charged. The reason for this is that the prosecutor has full control of the prosecution of criminal actions. It is his duty to always prosecute the proper offense, not any lesser or graver one, based on what the evidence on hand can sustain. More importantly, the plea is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, which may allow the accused to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the offense charged. 3 Thus, petitioner is not entitled to the grant of plea bargain simply on the basis of this Court's ruling in Estipona, Jr. v. Hon. Lobrigo4 and the issuance of Department of Justice Circular No. 061, series of 2017. 5
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The assailed Order dated January 18, 2018 of the Regional Trial Court in Iloilo City, Branch 25 in Criminal Case No. 15-76614 is hereby AFFIRMED. aDSIHc
The Hon. Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 25, Iloilo City, is DELETED as party respondent in this case pursuant to Sec. 4, Rule 45, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended; and Cash Collection and Disbursement Division is hereby DIRECTED to RETURN to the petitioner the excess payment for the legal fees in the amount of P470.00 under O.R. No. 0205438-SC-EP dated April 17, 2018.
SO ORDERED." Leonardo-De Castro, J., designated as Acting Chairperson of the First Division per Special Order No. 2559 dated May 11, 2018; Gesmundo, J., designated as Acting Member of the First Division per Special Order No. 2560 dated May 11, 2018.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENAActing Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Lalican v. Vergara, G.R. No. 108619 July 31, 1997, 276 SCRA 518, 530. Citation omitted.
2.Saint Mary Crusade to Alleviate Poverty of Brethren Foundation, Inc. v. Riel, G.R. No. 176508, January 12, 2015, 745 SCRA 50, 70-71. Citation omitted.
3. See People v. Villarama, Jr., G.R. No. 99287, June 23, 1992, 210 SCRA 246.
4. G.R. No. 226679, August 15, 2017.
5. Guidelines on Plea Bargaining Agreement for R.A. No. 9165 otherwise known as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2000."