CA revives drug, gun cases vs Kerwin
The Court of Appeals (CA) has ordered the revival of the cases of illegal possession of drugs and firearms against confessed drug lord Kerwin Espinosa.
In a 12-page ruling promulgated in February, the CA’s 12th Division vacated and set aside the disposition of two of the three criminal cases against Espinosa and ordered the Manila court to continue with the consolidated trial.
The two cases that will be revived are for violating Presidential Decree 1866 as amended by Republic Act 8294 (illegal possession of firearms and ammunition) and for violating Section 11 (illegal possession of dangerous drugs) of Article 2 of RA 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Three separate criminal cases were lodged against Espinosa before the Manila regional trial court (RTC) for violating Section 5 (illegal sale and distribution of dangerous drugs) and Section 11 (illegal possession of dangerous drugs) and for illegal possession of firearms and ammunition.
In an August 2020 decision written by then Presiding Judge Silvino Pampilo, the Manila RTC Branch 26 found Espinosa guilty of illegal possession of firearms but acquitted him on the two drug charges in a consolidated decision.
The charges were dismissed due to the failure of the prosecution of Espinosa’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution sought the reconsideration of the decision, which was denied on March 14, 2022. The resolution was penned by then Acting Presiding Judge John Benedict Medina.
This prompted the prosecution to elevate the case to the CA.
In its petition before the CA, the prosecution argued that the judge committed grave abuse of discretion in resolving the cases before the parties completed the presentation of their evidence.
Denied due process
In partially granting the prosecution’s petition, the CA noted that while the principle of double jeopardy prevents a person from being tried for the same offense twice, it does not apply in certain cases.
“The only instance when double jeopardy will not attach is when the trial court acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, such as where the prosecution was denied the opportunity to present its case or where the trial was a sham,” it said.
In this case, the CA said it found merit in the petition, citing adequate evidence that the prosecution was denied due process to fully present its evidence in the two criminal cases.
The CA said the judge’s decision did not mention that there was a consolidated trial of the three cases. Records also show that the prosecution rested only on one of the three criminal cases.
The CA said the ruling was promulgated without the presence of the handling public prosecutor as the latter could have clarified in open court that the prosecution has yet to rest its case on the two other criminal charges.
The CA said the handling public prosecutor, despite being available for videoconference hearing on the date of the promulgation of the assailed decision, was not able to receive an invitation link.
“The RTC seriously erred in proceeding with the promulgation of judgment without the public prosecutor despite his presence as early as 10 a.m.,” the decision read.
The decision was written by CAAssociate Justice Mary Charlene Hernandez-Azura.
Espinosa was one of the detainees who accused Leila de Lima of receiving drug money during her time as justice secretary.
He retracted his accusations in April 2022, saying he had been coerced.
The Bureau of Jail Management and Penology said Espinosa was released on Dec. 29, 2023 after posting bail on two money laundering cases in Pasay and a drug case in Leyte.