68 Webb v.

de Leon 247 SCRA 652 (rape case, media)

August 23, 1995 GR 121234 Puno
Article 3, Section 1 Erin Ng
Petitioners: Hubert Webb Respondents: Judge Raul De Leon
Doctrine:

Even if a judge may have been prompted by his desire to get rid of corruption and special
treatment extended to some prisoners, the same is not a licence for him to abuse his
judicial discretion by depriving the accused of his right to be heard

While judge may not always be subjected to disciplinary action for every erroneous order
or decision he renders, that relative immunity is not a licence to be negligent or abusive
or arbitrary in performing adjudicatory prerogatives—the issuance of an order without
the benefit of a hearing is a clear evidence of the judge’s failure to understand the
limitations of his power and betrays his ignorance of the cardinal principles of due
process.

Facts:
1. On June of 1994 the NBI filed a complaint with the DOJ charging Webb and his
companions with the crime of rape with homicide.

Issue/s: Ruling:
1. Whether or not respondent Judges de Leon and Tolentino 1. NO
gravely abused their discretion when they failed to conduct
a preliminary examination before issuing warrants of arrest
against them. No, the DOJ Panel did not gravely abuse its
discretion in issuing warrants of arrest against
the petitioners. Section 6 of Rule 112 simply provides that
“upon filing of an information, the Regional Trial Court may
issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused.”

Rationale/Analysis/Legal Basis:

No, the DOJ Panel did not gravely abuse its discretion in issuing warrants of arrest against
the petitioners. Section 6 of Rule 112 simply provides that “upon filing of an information,
the Regional Trial Court may issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused.”

Section 2 of Article III of the Constitution provides: “The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant
of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the complaint and the witnesses he may
produce and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to
be seized.

In arrest cases, there must be probable cause that a crime has been committed and that
the person to be arrested committed it.

Before issuing warrants of arrest, the judges merely determine personally the probability,
not the certainty of guilt, of an accused