This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-02-18 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Reyes asserts that the CA erred in ruling that there was no prejudicial question that warranted the suspension of the criminal proceedings against him; that the petition suffered fatal defects that merited its immediate dismissal; that the CA was wrong in relying on the pronouncements in Balgos, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan[12] and Umali v. Intermediate Appellate Court[13] because the factual backgrounds thereat were not similar to that obtaining here; and that the Secretary of Justice did not commit any grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. | |||||