G.R. No. 162205 - REVELINA LIMSON, VS. EUGENIO JUAN GONZALEZ.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully recommended that the instant case be considered closed and dismissed. Not content with said Resolution x x x, Limson filed a motion for reconsideration; [sic]which was again opposed by Gonzalez and which was denied by the Prosecutor x x x. Not agreeable to said Resolution x x x, Limson filed a Petition for Review with the Secretary of Justice x x x, to which x x x Gonzalez filed an Answer/Opposition x x x. The Secretary of Justice denied said Petition for Review of Limson, on April 3, 2002 x x x as follows: Section 12, in relation to Section 7, of Department Circular No. 70 dated July 3, 2000, provides that the Secretary of Justice may, motu propio, dismiss outright the petition if there is no showing of any reversible error in the assailed resolution or when issued [sic] raised therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration. We carefully examined the petition and its attachments and we found no such error committed by the prosecutor that would justify the reversal of the assailed resolution which is in accord with the evidence and law on the matter. Moreover, there was no showing that a copy of the petition was furnished the Prosecution Office concerned pursuant to Section 5 of said Department Circular. [2] Although Limson sought the reconsideration of the adverse resolution of April 3, 2002, the Secretary of Justice denied her motion for reconsideration on October 15, 2002. Decision of the CA Limson assailed on certiorari the adverse resolutions of the Secretary of Justice in the CA, claiming that the Secretary of Justice had thereby committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction for misappreciating her evidence establishing her charges of falsification and violation of the Anti-Alias Law against respondent. On July 31, 2003, the CA promulgated its assailed decision dismissing the petition for certiorari , disposing as follows: WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing discussions, the instant Petition is perforce DENIED . Accordingly, the Resolutions subject of this petition are AFFIRMED . SO ORDERED.