Adelaida Yatco v. Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon

Summary

This Supreme Court case clarifies the proper procedural remedies for challenging consolidated Ombudsman rulings. Petitioner Yatco filed a Rule 65 certiorari petition before the Court of Appeals to challenge both administrative and criminal aspects of an Ombudsman joint resolution that dismissed her complaints against Biñan, Laguna officials. The Court of Appeals correctly dismissed the petition regarding the criminal aspect, ruling it lacked jurisdiction over criminal cases from the Ombudsman. The Supreme Court affirmed, reiterating established jurisprudence that administrative aspects of unappealable Ombudsman rulings may be challenged via Rule 65 certiorari before the CA, while criminal aspects must be challenged via Rule 65 certiorari before the Supreme Court. The consolidation of charges does not alter these distinct procedural requirements, and each aspect must be assailed through its proper remedy before the appropriate court.