Re: Motion to Withdraw Information in Criminal Cases

Carolina B. Jose vs. Purita Suarez, G.R. No. 176111, 17 July 2013 held that "when a trial court is confronted to rule on 'a motion to dismiss a case or withdraw an Information', it is its 'bounden duty to assess independently the merits of the motion, and this assessment must be embodied in a written order disposing of the motion.'"

This means that the trial court cannot just perfunctorily deny a motion to withdraw an information and instead, as explained in Carolina B. Jose, must state and/or do the following:

1. Positively state that the evidence is sufficient to make out a case for the offense charged;
2. Include a discussion on the merits of the case;
3. Assess if the DOJ's conclusion is supported by evidence;
4. Look at the basis of the DOJ's recommendation;
5. Embody its assessment in the said Order; and
6. State the reason/s in denying the motion to withdraw Information.

The Supreme Court held that the trial court's failure to do any of the above constitutes grave abuse of discretion amounting to excess of jurisdiction; hence correctible by certiorari, as in the case above where the trial court denied the motion to withdraw information by saying that it appeared "unmeritorious" without more.

---

Food for thought: If the trial court is made to make these findings in its Order denying the motion to withdraw information, can it be accused of pre-judgment or bias on the basis of the said Order later on, thus giving ground for inhibition?

Furthermore, assuming arguendo that the prosecution insists on withdrawing the Information, can the trial court compel the prosecutor to prosecute even though he did not want to do the same to begin with? Would this not also eventually result in the dismissal of the case if the prosecutor lacks the conviction necessary to prosecute the case zealously?