G.R. No. L-37635 July 22, 1975
CRESENCIO MARTINEZ, petitioner, vs. LEOPOLDO B. GIRONELLA, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Abra, Branch II, respondent.

FACTS

In Criminal Case No. 21 for Murder, the Court of First Instance of Abra, Branch II, presided by respondent Judge, initially tried only the accessory Arnold Bayongan, as the principal accused Cresencio Martinez was at large. In the decision acquitting Bayongan, the court included a statement that “the offense of murder was clearly established and was committed by Cresencio Martinez.” Martinez later surrendered, was arraigned before the same branch, and pleaded not guilty. Before trial, his counsel moved for the judge’s inhibition, arguing the prior finding showed prejudgment and partiality. The judge denied the motion orally, and petitioner did not seek reconsideration. The trial proceeded to the rebuttal stage.
Petitioner then filed this Petition for Prohibition, seeking to prohibit respondent Judge from hearing and deciding the case, declaring a mistrial, and transferring the case to another branch. The Solicitor General, in comment, supported the petition, citing jurisprudence on the need for impartiality. Respondent Judge defended his capacity for impartiality, explaining the prior statement was based solely on prosecution evidence from a separate trial where Martinez was not heard.

ISSUE

1. Whether a new trial should be ordered for petitioner.
2. Whether respondent Judge should be allowed to decide the case.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition in part. On the first issue, the Court declined to order a new trial. Petitioner failed to cite specific acts of partiality during the trial and did not move for reconsideration of the denial of his inhibition motion, proceeding with the trial until late stage. These circumstances indicated the trial itself was conducted fairly and impartially.
On the second issue, the Court held respondent Judge must be prohibited from deciding the case. While acknowledging his capacity for impartiality, the Court emphasized that a judge must not only be impartial but must also appear to be so to maintain public confidence in the judiciary. The judge’s unequivocal prior finding in the Bayongan decision that Martinez committed the murder created an ineradicable suspicion of bias if he were to decide Martinez’s case. This compromised the requirement of an impartial tribunal under due process. Consequently, the Court ordered the case records transmitted to another court (Branch IV, CFI Ilocos Sur) for decision.