Mayor Dalupan, who was notorious for being involved in rigged public biddings, was convicted by the Sandiganbayan, in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, for violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Seeking to overturn his conviction, Mayor Dalupan filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court on the 59th day from notice of the assailed Sandiganbayan ruling. Is the remedy availed of by Mayor Dalupan correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, the remedy availed of by Mayor Dalupan is not correct. Under Section 1, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court and jurisprudence, a special civil action for certiorari is an extraordinary remedy available only when there is no appeal or
Unlock the full Remedial Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What is the proper remedy to appeal a conviction rendered by the Sandiganbayan in its original jurisdiction where the penalty is less than reclusion perpetua?
Convictions rendered by the Sandiganbayan in its original jurisdiction are appealable to the Supreme Court under Rule 45.
Within what reglementary period must an appeal from a Sandiganbayan conviction be filed under Rule 45?
The reglementary period for filing a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 is fifteen days from notice.
Can a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 be used as a substitute for a lost appeal?
Certiorari under Rule 65 cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal that was lost through a party's fault or inaction.
What happens to a Sandiganbayan judgment of conviction if no appeal is filed within the 15-day period?
Choices available with full access.
Under what condition is a Rule 65 petition for certiorari proper against a judicial decision?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Sandiganbayan Appeal Mode
Decisions rendered by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction are appealable to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, or through an ordinary appeal in cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. An appeal is the proper, adequate, and speedy remedy provided by law to review factual and legal errors committed by the Sandiganbayan. A convicted public officer must strictly observe the mandatory fifteen-day reglementary period for appealing the conviction to the highest tribunal.
2. Certiorari Exclusivity
A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 is an extraordinary remedy available exclusively when there is no appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Certiorari is designed solely to correct errors of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion, not errors of judgment. It is well-settled in remedial law that certiorari cannot serve as a substitute for an appeal that was lost due to a party's failure or neglect to file a timely appeal within the prescribed reglementary period.
3. Lapsed Appeal Effect
When a convicted party fails to file an appeal within the mandatory fifteen-day reglementary period, the decision of the Sandiganbayan becomes final, executory, and unappealable. Resorting to a Rule 65 petition on the fifty-ninth day from notice cannot revive the lost right of appeal or extend the reglementary period. Allowing certiorari as a substitute for a lapsed appeal would undermine the fundamental doctrine of immutability of final judgments and erode the orderly administration of criminal justice.