G.R. No. 260214. April 17, 2023
ERWIN ALVERO TRESVALLES, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Erwin Alvero y Tresvalles was charged with violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (illegal sale of 0.1459 grams of shabu). During the presentation of the prosecution’s evidence, Alvero filed a Proposal for Plea Bargaining, praying to plead guilty to violation of Section 12, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 (possession of drug paraphernalia) in accordance with A.M. No. 18-03-16-SC (Plea Bargaining Framework in Drugs Cases). The prosecution objected, arguing that under DOJ Department Circular No. 027, the acceptable plea for violation of Section 5 is Section 11 (possession of dangerous drugs), that no plea bargain is allowed as Alvero was charged under a theory of conspiracy under Section 26, and that its evidence was sufficient for conviction. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted Alvero’s proposal over the prosecution’s objection, re-arraigned him for violation of Section 12, accepted his guilty plea, and sentenced him accordingly. The RTC denied the prosecution’s motion for reconsideration. The Office of the Solicitor General filed a Petition for Certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), which granted the petition, nullified the RTC’s decision and order, and directed the continuation of the trial, ruling that the prosecution’s consent is essential and that the RTC erred in allowing a plea bargain to an offense not necessarily included in illegal sale. Alvero filed this Petition for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE

Did the RTC act with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it allowed Alvero to plea bargain in this case?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court ruled that the RTC did not act with grave abuse of discretion. Applying the doctrine established in People v. Montierro, the Court held that while prosecutorial discretion pertains to matters of charging and prosecution, a trial court may overrule a prosecution’s objection to a plea bargain if such objection is based solely on an Executive issuance (like a DOJ circular) that contradicts a Court-issued rule (like the Plea Bargaining Framework). The Court found that Alvero’s proposal conformed with the Plea Bargaining Framework. However, the Court noted that under Montierro, a trial court must first determine specific disqualifying factors before allowing a plea bargain. Since the RTC Decision and Order did not show any findings on whether (a) the accused is a recidivist, habitual offender, known drug addict/troublemaker, has relapsed after rehabilitation, or has been charged many times, or (b) the evidence of guilt is strong, the case was remanded to the RTC to make these determinations. The Petition was granted, the CA Decision was reversed, and the case was remanded to the RTC for further proceedings consistent with the guidelines.