AM MTJ 05 1608; (February, 2006) (Digest)
A.M. No. MTJ-05-1608. February 28, 2006. BERNARDO P. BETOY, SR., Complainant, vs. JUDGE MAMERTO Y. COLIFLORES, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Bernardo P. Betoy, Sr., through an affidavit executed by his wife, charged respondent Judge Mamerto Y. Coliflores with Grave Abuse of Discretion, Conduct Unbecoming, and Gross Negligence. The charges stemmed from the judge’s issuance of Search Warrant No. 0854 on September 17, 1999, against the complainant’s residence. The complainant alleged that the warrant was issued based solely on the affidavits of police officers without the judge conducting a probing and exhaustive examination of the applicants to determine probable cause personally, as required by law. Furthermore, the complainant asserted that the respondent judge failed to conduct a judicial inquiry within 48 hours after the warrant’s service, as mandated by the Rules of Court, to determine the whereabouts of the allegedly seized contraband.
In his defense, Judge Coliflores countered that he personally examined the applicant and witnesses through searching questions and answers, thereby complying with constitutional and statutory requirements for establishing probable cause. He argued that any challenge to the warrant’s validity should be raised in a proper motion in court. He also contended that he had no control over the implementing officers’ conduct after the warrant’s issuance and noted that he had granted motions for the release of some seized items.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Judge Mamerto Y. Coliflores is administratively liable for his actions concerning the issuance and post-implementation oversight of Search Warrant No. 0854.
RULING
Yes, the respondent judge is administratively liable for Gross Ignorance of the Law. The Supreme Court found that while the judge personally examined the applicants, the questions propounded were not sufficiently probing and exhaustive to establish probable cause meticulously, as required by jurisprudence. More significantly, the Court emphasized the judge’s mandatory duty under Section 12(b), Rule 126 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. This rule requires the judge who issued the warrant to conduct a judicial inquiry within 48 hours after its service to ascertain whether the search was conducted properly and the items seized were delivered to the court.
The respondent judge’s failure to conduct this post-search inquiry constituted a blatant disregard of a clear and basic procedural rule. Judges are presumed to know and are duty-bound to keep abreast of the law. Ignorance of such a fundamental rule, especially one designed as a safeguard against arbitrary searches, amounts to gross ignorance of the law. The offense is classified as a serious charge. Considering that Judge Coliflores had already compulsorily retired, the Court imposed a fine of Twenty Thousand Pesos (₱20,000.00), to be deducted from his retirement benefits.