A.M. No. RTJ-99-1449 (Formerly OCA IPI No 97-350-RTJ) - EDMUNDO & CARMELITA BALDERAMA, COMPLAINANTS, VS. JUDGE ADOLFO F. ALAGAR.RESOLUTION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, they were convicted of the crimes charged; 2) In the above-mentioned three latter cases, the undersigned played an important role in the plea bargaining by convincing the complainants to agree to the plea bargaining for humanitarian reasons xxx; so that with the consent of the complainants therein, I have awarded them a sentence which is within the Probation period, when they could have actually meted higher penalty since there are three cases involved; xxx 3) It is true that the undersigned have advised the accused (complainants herein) to plead guilty, albeit forcefully, but only to help them get another plea bargaining, because to the mind of this Court, if they are found guilty, they would be considered habitual delinquents since the Private Prosecutor has manifested that their evidences in the first three decided cases where the same accused pleaded guilty, will be the same evidences to be used in this pending case; xxx 4) The allegations of accused that the undersigned had been going to the residence of private complainants in said cases for so many times as enumerated in their Complaint is pure hearsay because in truth and in fact the undersigned have (sic) not been to the residence of said complainants, but to the seashore of Barangay Pandan, Bacnotan, La Union, which undersigned came to know later (from the instant Complaint) that said place is the residence of both parties in the aforementioned Criminal Cases; xxx 5) If ever my car was used by complainants as a ride in my coming to San Fernando, I am not personally aware of it; however, upon investigation after receiving the instant Complaint, I found out that my Court Aide/driver has once or twice allowed the complainants, including one or two of their relatives to ride with him while coming back from buying fish in the morning; and that he had been parking my car in front of the complainants house allegedly because it would be safer there since they could oversee it while he (my driver/Court Aide) is on the seashore waiting for fishermen to dock their boats with their fish catch and/or while buying fish in the seashore; Respondent Judge Alagar, thereby, moved for the dismissal of the instant complaint for lack of merit. Likewise, affidavits executed by Alpenio Q. Fontanilla and Court Aide Oscar D. Bugain were submitted by respondent Judge to bolster his claim of impartiality in dealing with the complainants in connection with the case pending before his sala. On October 20, 1997, respondent Judge filed an "Addendum to Comment" attaching therein the affidavit of Atty. Celso Alex Laudenorio, former counsel of herein complainants. [4] On June 28, 1999, the Court resolved to docket the case as a regular administrative proceedings and to require the parties to manifest whether they were willing to submit the case for decision on the basis of the pleadings filed. [5] In compliance with the resolution, respondent Judge manifested his intention to argue his case before the C