G.R. No. 259094 - RODULFO FERRAREN AQUINO A.K.A. "YOYON", VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, Aquino was re-arraigned and pled guilty to two charges of violation of Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165. [16] On the same day, the RTC rendered its Joint Judgment finding Aquino guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia under Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165. [17] Dissatisfied, the prosecution moved for reconsideration, [18] insisting that consent of the prosecution is necessary in plea bargaining. However, the RTC brushed the motion aside in its June 21, 2019 Order. [19] The People of the Philippines, acting through the Office of the Solicitor General, instituted an original action for petition for certiorari [20] under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court before the CA, imputing grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC when it issued the May 30, 2019 and June 21, 2019 Orders, as well as when it rendered the Joint Judgment. [21] In the now-assailed Decision, the CA granted the petition and annulled the foregoing rulings. [22] The CA held that while A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC allows an accused to plead to the lesser offense of violation of Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165 from the original charge of violation of Section 5 of the same law, the consent of both the offended party and the prosecutor are still required, pursuant to Rule 116, Section 2 of the Rules of Court. Aquino beseeched the CA to take a second look at its disposition, [23] but this was given short shrift by the CA. Via the present recourse, Aquino entreats the Court for a reversal of the impugned Decision and the oppugned Resolution of the CA. The Court's Ruling The Petition is impressed with merit. To recapitulate, in Criminal Case No.2019-26185, Aquino was charged in the Information for the offense of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, but moved to plead guilty to a lesser offense, i.e., illegal possession of drug paraphernalia. The prosecution vehemently objected to Aquino's motion on the ground that DOJ Department Circular No. 027 does not allow plea bargaining for violation of Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165, viz.: That under Memorandum Circular No. 027 issued by the [DOJ] on June 26, 2018, Re: Amended Guidelines on Plea Bargaining for Republic Act No. 9165 otherwise known as the "Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2000", [does] not allow plea bargaining for violation of Section 5, Article II, Republic Act No. 9165 to plead guilty to violation of Section 12, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165; That the undersigned cannot give his consent in [sic] behalf of the State and interposed its vigorous objection to the proposal of the accused in Criminal Case No. [2019-]26185 as it is not in accordance with Department Circular No. 027 dated June 26, 2018[.] [24] However, the RTC granted Aquino's motion. It held that the requirement of consent on the part of the prosecutor and the offended party is not a mechanism to countermand the discretionary power of the court to grant or approve the