This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-03-11 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| The foregoing notwithstanding, Judge Larida should not have acted on Espiritu's motion to quash without first giving the public prosecutor the opportunity to comment on the motion. That opportunity was demanded by due process.[41] As a judge, he should exercise patience and circumspection to ensure that the opposing sides are allowed the opportunity to be present and to be heard.[42] Only thereby could he preclude any suspicion on the impartiality of his actuations.[43] But he cannot now be sanctioned because it is a matter of public policy that in the absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a judge done in his judicial capacity are not subject to disciplinary action although they are erroneous.[44] Considering that there was no fraud, dishonesty or corruption that attended the omission of prior notice, we simply caution him against a repetition of the omission of prior notice. | |||||