A.M. No. RTJ-07-2076/A.M. No. RTJ-07-2077/A.M. No. RTJ-2078/A.M. No. RTJ-07-2079/A.M. No. RTJ-07-2080; October 12, 2010
OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, et al., Complainants, vs. JUDGE ALBERTO L. LERMA, Respondent.

FACTS

Five consolidated administrative complaints were filed against Judge Alberto L. Lerma of the RTC, Branch 256, Muntinlupa City. In A.M. No. RTJ-07-2076, the OCA charged him with violating a Supreme Court directive. The High Court had referred Criminal Case No. 3639-R to his branch solely for the limited purpose of arraigning the accused and taking his testimony, after which the records were to be returned to the court of origin. Judge Lerma, however, proceeded to rule on a demurrer to evidence and dismissed the case, thereby deciding its merits beyond his authorized jurisdiction.
In the other cases, he was charged with various infractions including gross ignorance of the law for issuing a warrant of arrest without a prior determination of probable cause based on the prosecutor’s resolution and supporting evidence (A.M. No. RTJ-07-2078); undue delay in resolving a motion for inhibition and for abusing judicial authority by compelling a party to secure a certification from the Supreme Court (A.M. No. RTJ-07-2079); and gross negligence for failing to decide cases within the reglementary period and for making untruthful statements in his Certificates of Service (A.M. No. RTJ-07-2080). The cases were investigated by a Court of Appeals Justice.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Alberto L. Lerma is administratively liable for the various charges against him, including violation of Supreme Court directives, gross ignorance of the law, undue delay, abuse of authority, and gross negligence.

RULING

Yes, Judge Lerma is administratively liable on all counts. The Court found his actions constituted a pattern of misconduct warranting severe penalties. In A.M. No. RTJ-07-2076, his act of deciding the criminal case exceeded the Supreme Court’s limited referral, constituting a violation of a lawful order. For gross ignorance of the law in A.M. No. RTJ-07-2078, the Court emphasized that a judge must personally evaluate the prosecutor’s resolution and the evidence before issuing a warrant; reliance solely on the information is a gross violation of constitutional and procedural rules. His delay in resolving a motion and his abusive imposition of an unreasonable requirement on a litigant in A.M. No. RTJ-07-2079 demonstrated inefficiency and arrogance.
Most seriously, in A.M. No. RTJ-07-2080, his failure to decide cases within the mandated period and his subsequent false certifications in his Certificates of Service constituted gross misconduct and dishonesty, which are grave offenses. Considering the totality of the infractions, which revealed a character unfit for judicial office, the Supreme Court imposed the ultimate penalty. Judge Alberto L. Lerma was DISMISSED from service with forfeiture of all retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with prejudice to reemployment in any government agency. Fines were also imposed for the other charges where dismissal was not the specific penalty.