Petitioner
Sherwin T. Gatchalian
Respondent
Office of the Ombudsman
Citation
G.R. No. 229288
Court
Office of the Ombudsman to Court of Appeals (CA) to Supreme Court (SC)
Division
Second Division
Ponente
Caguioa, J.
Decided
August 1, 2018

Summary

This case resolved a jurisdictional dispute over which court can review Ombudsman decisions in criminal cases. Gatchalian, facing corruption charges from the Ombudsman, filed a certiorari petition with the Court of Appeals, arguing that the Morales decision gave the CA jurisdiction over all Ombudsman cases. The CA dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The Court clarified that Morales applied only to administrative cases involving interlocutory orders like preventive suspension, not to final determinations of probable cause in criminal cases. The established rule remains: challenges to Ombudsman findings in criminal cases must be filed with the Supreme Court via Rule 65 certiorari, while administrative cases go to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43. This decision reinforced the constitutional separation of judicial review procedures for different types of Ombudsman cases.

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · August 1, 2018

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.