Choa v. Chiongson

A.M. No. MTJ-95-1063 (February 9, 1996)

Facts:

The case involves an administrative complaint filed by Alfonso C. Choa against Judge Roberto S. Chiongson, who presided over Criminal Case No. 50322, where Choa was charged with perjury. The perjury charge stemmed from allegations made by Choa's wife, Leni L. Ong-Choa, regarding false statements made in Choa's Petition for Naturalization dated March 30, 1989. The petition claimed that Choa was married to Leni and that they resided at a specific address in Bacolod City, which was untrue as Leni and their children had moved out in 1984.

The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MCTC) of Bacolod City found Choa guilty of perjury on February 21, 1995, sentencing him to six months and one day of imprisonment. Choa filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the conviction was baseless since the petition for naturalization had been withdrawn, rendering it functus officio, and that the allegations in the information did not constitute perjury. The motion was denied on March 31, 1995.

Subsequently, Choa filed an administrative complaint against Judge Chiongson on July 14, 1995, alleging grave misconduct, gross bias, and partiality, claiming that the judge failed to disclose a neighborly relationship with Leni Ong-Choa, which he argued should have disqualified the judge from presiding over the case. Choa also contended that the judge had rendered an unjust judgment and that the evidence presented was inadmissible.

Legal Issues:

1. Whether Judge Chiongson committed grave misconduct, gross bias, and partiality in presiding over the perjury case against Choa.
2. Whether the allegations in the information constituted the offense of perjury.
3. Whether the withdrawal of the Petition for Naturalization rendered the statements made therein functus officio and thus not actionable.
4. Whether the judge erred in admitting certain pieces of evidence and in the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Arguments:

Complainant's Arguments:

• Choa argued that Judge Chiongson should have disqualified himself due to their neighborly relationship, which he claimed indicated bias.
• He contended that the allegations in the information did not constitute perjury, as the petition had been withdrawn and thus had no legal effect.
• Choa claimed that the judge improperly admitted self-serving evidence and imposed a penalty exceeding what was legally permissible under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Respondent's Arguments:

• Judge Chiongson denied any neighborly relationship with Leni Ong-Choa, asserting that he had no acquaintance with her or her family.
• He maintained that the allegations in the information constituted perjury, as Choa had made false statements under oath regarding material matters required by law.
• The judge argued that the withdrawal of the petition did not extinguish the offense of perjury, as the statements made were still actionable.
• He defended the admissibility of the evidence presented and asserted that the Indeterminate Sentence Law did not apply to the case since the penalty did not exceed one year.

Court's Decision and Legal Reasoning:

The court dismissed the administrative complaint against Judge Chiongson for lack of merit. It found that the allegations made by Choa were baseless and that the judge had not violated any rules regarding disqualification. The court noted that even if Judge Chiongson were a neighbor of Leni Ong-Choa, this alone did not constitute grounds for disqualification under the Rules of Court.

The court also affirmed that the elements of perjury were present in Choa's case, as he had made false statements under oath in his petition for naturalization, which was required by law. The withdrawal of the petition did not negate the falsehoods made, and the judge's decision to admit the evidence was upheld.

Regarding the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the court clarified that it was not applicable since the penalty imposed did not exceed one year. The court emphasized that the nature of Choa's grievances should have been addressed through an appeal of the conviction rather than through an administrative complaint against the judge.

Significant Legal Principles Established:

• The relationship of being a neighbor to a party-litigant does not automatically disqualify a judge from presiding over a case.
• The withdrawal of a petition does not extinguish the potential for perjury charges based on false statements made in that petition.
• The Indeterminate Sentence Law applies only when the maximum term of imprisonment exceeds one year.