Compliance-Show Cause Order

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
FIRST DIVISION
MONICO O. PUENTEVELLA,
Petitioner,
SC-GR No. 210696
-versusOFFICE OF THEOMBUDSMAN,
ET AL.,
Respondents.
x - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
COMPLIANCE
ATTY. HOWARD M. CALLEJAof Calleja Law Office, by counsel
and unto this Honorable Court, respectfully avers:
1. On 7 April 2016, the Calleja Law Office received its copy of this Honorable
Courts Resolution of 24 February 2016 informing it, among other things, of
the dismissal of the Petition for Certiorari in this case for failure of the
petitioner to sufficiently show that the Ombudsman committed grave abuse
of discretion when it issued the challenged judgments.
2. Incidentally, this Honorable Court, in the aforementioned Resolution,
required of Atty. Howard M. Calleja to SHOW CAUSE within ten (10) days
from receipt of the aforementioned Resolution why he should not be
disciplinarily dealt with or held in contempt of court, together with Atty.
Ralph A. Sarmiento, who has not withdrew as counsel for petitioner insofar
as Atty. Calleja has reason to believe based on his knowledge and
information, in relation to a purportedly altered Motion to Transfer Hearing
that was attached as Annex F to the instant Petition for Certiorari filed on 27
January 2014.Hence, this compliance which is being timely filed.
3. Record of this case would readily disclose that Atty. Calleja filed with the
Honorable Supreme Court on 6 November 2015 his Entry of Appearance as
counsel for petitioner Puentevella in this case, which was thereafter
forwarded to the Honorable First Division on 11 November 2015.
4. Further note should be duly taken by this Honorable Court of the fact that
the Petition for Certiorari (with Application for Preliminary Injunction and
Temporary Restraining Order) docketed as G.R. No. 210696 was filed by
Atty. Ralph A. Sarmiento (Sarmiento) on 27 January 2014, while the now

questioned Annex F thereof, which is the Motion to Transfer Hearing dated
24 November 2009 filed before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for
the Visayas (OMB-Visayas) in the case docketed as OMB-V-C-07-0134-D1
was filed by Atty. Adelaida R. Rendon (Rendon) sometime on 24 November
2009, who was then representing petitioner Puentevella as respondent
therein during the preliminary investigation being conducted by the OMBVisayas.
5. Given the circumstances surrounding this case, insofar as the preparation
and filing of the Petition for Certiorari before the Honorable Supreme Court
on 27 January 2014, the attachment of the questioned Motion to Transfer
Hearing dated 24 November 2009 as Annex F to said Petition, and the
preparation and filing of the aforementioned Motion, Atty. Calleja
respectfully submits, as he likewise begs the indulgence of this Honorable
Court, that he had no participation whatsoever as regards such prior matters
since he only became counsel of petitioner when the case was elevated to the
Supreme Court and after more than a year had passed since the filing
thereof. To reiterate, the Petition for Certiorari was filed on 27 January 2015
and was apparently prepared for petitioner Puentevella by Atty. Sarmiento
while the questioned Annex F, which is the Motion to Transfer Hearing filed
before OMB-Visayas was prepared for petitioner Puentevella by Atty.
Rendon and was filed way back in 24 November 2009.
6. Atty. Calleja cannot be reasonably expected to know whether the questioned
Annex F was altered or not given that he only entered his appearance as
counsel for petitioner Puentevella on 6 November 2015. He was in no way
involved in the case of petitioner Puentevella from its inception during the
proceedings before the OMB-Visayas up to the time the Petition for
Certiorari was filed before the Honorable Supreme Court. Moreover, as a
fellow officer of the court, he relied in good faith with the representations
made by Attys. Sarmiento and Rendon for which he should not be faulted at
all.
7. Moreover, Atty. Calleja respectfully maintains that he had not violated Rules
10.01, 10.02 and 10.03 of Canon 10, Code of Professional Responsibility
(CPR). He respectfully submits that he had faithfully and conscientiously
performed his duties, both as counsel for petitioner Puentevella and as an
officer of the court. Relative thereto, Atty. Calleja humbly posits the
following:
a.) He has not committed any falsehood nor had he consented to
the doing of the same, much more mislead this Honorable
Court or allow It to be misled by any artifice, as provided in
Rule 10.01, Canon 10, CPR, as he was not involved in the
1The case is entitled Joselito T. Bayatan vs. Monico O. Puentevella, et al., which later became
the subject of the instant Petition for Certiorari docketed as G.R. No. 21096.
preparation and filing of the subject Petition for Certiorari

and the attachment of the questioned Motion as Annex F
thereto;
b.) He has not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents
of the subject Petition or the questioned Motion, as provided
in Rule 10.02, Canon 10, CPR, as he was not the author of
either pleading or paper; and finally
c.) In keeping with the clear mandate of Rule 10.03, Canon 10,
CPR, he has, at all times, observed the rules of procedure
and has not misused them to defeat the ends of justice as he
had been conscientious in his dealings with his client,
petitioner Puentevella, with his fellow lawyers, and most
important of all, with this Honorable Court.
8. Atty. Calleja has not been remiss or negligent in discharging his twin duties
to his client and to the courts, yet he would nonetheless beg the
understanding and leniency of this Honorable Court for any honest lapses
for which he may be reasonably held accountable for, but not for the
purported alterations on the questioned Motion in the off-chance that indeed
it was altered.
RELIEF
WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, Atty. Howard M. Calleja, counsel
for petitioner Monico O. Puentevella, respectfully prays that this Honorable
Court:
1. NOTE this Compliance;
2. CONSIDER as having SUFFICIENTLY EXPLAINED his
involvement as regards the issue on the purported altered Motion
to Transfer Hearing that was attached as Annex F to the Petition for
Certiorari filed on 27 January 2014; and
3. RENDER a Resolution declaring Atty. Howard M. Calleja
without any liability in the matter/issue at hand.
Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.
Pasig City for Manila City. 17 April 2016.
By:
Copy furnished:
OFFICE OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
National Government Center
Agham Road, Diliman, Quezon City
SANDIGANBAYAN
Centennial Building
Commonwealth Ave., Quezon City
EXPLANATION
Due to distance, time constraints, and sufficient manpower, personal
filing and service of this Compliance was not resorted to and instead copies
of the same were sent by registered mail with attached registry receipts.
ALFREDO L. BENTULAN JR.

Compliance-Show Cause Order

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compliance-Show Cause Order

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compliance-Show Cause Order

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the case about?

What issue is the lawyer addressing in his compliance?

Republic of the Philippines

Atty. Ralph A. Sarmiento (Sarmiento) on 27 January 2014, while the now

preparation and filing of the subject Petition for Certiorari

You might also like