G.R. No. 249629 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. EDGAR MAJINGCAR Y YABUT AND CHRISTOPHER RYAN LLAGUNO Y MATOS.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered[, the] Department of Justice (DOJ) Circular No. 061 dated [November] 21, 2017, DOJ Circular No. 027 dated June 26, 2018 and Regional Prosecution Office (RPO) Order No. 027-E-18 dated May 17, 2018 are hereby DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND INVALID for being in contravention to or undermining the rule-making power of the SC, its Estipona Decision, its A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC Resolution ( Adopting the Plea Bargaining Framework in [Drugs] Cases ), and the equal protection clause in their (the said DOJ issuances) application if not in their design. The defense Proposal for Plea Bargaining is ALLOWED over the 'vigorous' objection of the prosecution. RE-ARRAIGN the accused in accordance therewith at the next scheduled hearing (on August 8). [11] The prosecution moved to reconsider [12] but it was denied under Plea Bargaining Resolution II [13] dated September 1, 2018. Consequently, on September 5, 2018, respondents were re-arraigned. Pursuant to their respective plea bargaining proposals, as approved by the court, they changed their individual pleas of "not guilty" to "guilty" to the lesser offense of violation of Section 12, Article II of RA 9165 in both Criminal Case Nos. 2016-0774 and 2016-0775. On September 18, 2018, the trial court issued the assailed Judgment, [14] viz. : WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered FINDING both accused EDGAR MAJINGCAR y Yabut , and CHRISTOPHER RYAN LLAGUNO y Matos GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt: [a] In Crim. Case No. 0774 as principals in the special offense of violation of R.A. 9165, Sec. 12 and are EACH SENTENCED to an indeterminate prison term of TWO (2) YEARS as minimum to THREE (3) YEARS as maximum , and a FINE of TWENTY THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00); and [b] In Crim. Case No. 0775 as principals in the special offense of violation of R.A. 9165, Sec. 12 and are EACH SENTENCED to an indeterminate prison term of ONE (1) YEAR as minimum to TWO (2) YEARS as maximum , and a FINE of TWENTY THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00). [15] Ruling of the Court of Appeals On a petition for certiorari initiated by the People, the Court of Appeals, as borne in its Decision [16] dated April 5, 2019, dismissed the petition on two (2) grounds: late filing and lack of merit. [17] The Court of Appeals stated that the petition should be dismissed as it was filed only on November 16, 2018 beyond the sixty (60) day period which supposedly expired on November 4, 2018. On the merits, the Court of Appeals pronounced that the petition should still fail for failure to show that the trial court gravely abused its discretion when it allowed respondents to plead to a lesser offense in both cases, following A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC. On this score, the Court of Appeals cited Estipona v. Hon. Lobrigo [18] which struck down as unconstitutional the prohibition against plea bargaining in drugs cases. It further upheld the trial court's declaration that DOJ Circular Nos. 027 and 061 and RPO Order No. 027-E-18 are unconstitu