a. Motion to Reopen or for Reinvestigation

Motion for reconsideration

Only one motion for reconsideration or reinvestigation of an approved order or resolution shall be allowed, the same to be filed within five (5) days from notice thereof with the Office of the Ombudsman, or the proper Deputy Ombudsman as the case may be, with the corresponding leave of court in cases where information has already been filed in court. (Rule II, Sec. 7, Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman)

The filing of a motion for reconsideration/reinvestigation shall not bar the filing of the corresponding information in Court on the basis of the finding of probable cause in the resolution subject of the motion. (Rule II, Sec. 7, Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman)

A reinvestigation does not operate to obliterate the proceedings already had by the Ombudsman and does not bar the filing of information or disturb the information already filed. The reinvestigation merely gave the respondent the opportunity to be heard which he claimed have been denied him. (People v. Sandiganbayan and Holganza, G.R. No. 232737, Oct. 2, 2019)

If the Secretary reverses the ruling of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, the Secretary shall:

• Direct the prosecutor to file the corresponding information without conducting another preliminary investigation; or
• Dismiss or move for the dismissal of the complaint or information with notice to the parties (Rule 112, Sec. 4).

NOTE: A provincial or city prosecutor has neither the personality nor the legal authority to review or overrule the decision of the secretary. The only time that a motion for reinvestigation may be filed is when there is newly discovered evidence. Such must be filed before the secretary of justice rules on an appeal of the resolution in the preliminary investigation. (Community Rural Bank of Guimba, Inc. v. Talavera, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1909, 2005)

NOTE: The Secretary of Justice is empowered to review the actions of the Provincial Fiscal during the preliminary investigation or the reinvestigation by virtue of Section 4, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court which recognizes the Secretary of Justice's power to review the actions of the investigating prosecutor, even motu proprio. (Fortaleza v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 179287, 2016)

NOTE: Under Rule 112, Section 4 of the Rules of Court, the Secretary of Justice may motu proprio reverse or modify resolutions of the provincial or city prosecutor or the chief state prosecutor even without a pending petition for review. The Secretary of Justice exercises control and supervision over prosecutors and it is within her- authority to affirm, nullify, reverse, or modify the resolutions of her prosecutors.

Section 4 of Republic Act No. 10071 also gives the Secretary of Justice the authority to directly act on any "probable miscarriage of justice within the jurisdiction of the prosecution staff, regional prosecution office, and the provincial prosecutor or the city prosecutor." Accordingly, the Secretary of Justice may step in and order a reinvestigation even without a prior motion or petition from a party in order to prevent any probable miscarriage of justice. (De Lima v. Reyes, G.R. No. 209330, 2016)

Motion for reconsideration or reinvestigation

Whenever allowable, a motion for reconsideration or reinvestigation may only be entertained if filed within ten (10) days from receipt of the decision or order on the basis of any of the following grounds:

• New evidence had been discovered which materially affects the order, directive or decision;
• Grave errors of facts or laws or serious irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the movant

Only one motion for reconsideration or reinvestigation shall be allowed. (Rule III, Sec. 8, Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman)

Reinvestigation

Once the complaint or information is filed in court, any motion for reinvestigation is addressed to the sound discretion of the court (Leviste v. Alameda, G.R. No. 182677, August 3, 2010).

While the trial court judge has the power to order the reinvestigation of the case by the prosecutor, he may not, before the prosecutor concluded the reinvestigation, recall said order, set the case for arraignment and trial, without gravely abusing his discretion.

Basis for Reinvestigation

• New evidence had been discovered which materially affects the order, directive or decision;
• Grave errors of facts or laws or serious irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the movant.

NOTE: The rule now is that the investigating judge’s power to order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in which there is a necessity for placing him in custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. Thus, even if the judge finds probable cause, he cannot, on such ground alone, issue a warrant of arrest. He must further find if there is a necessity of placing the accused under immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. (See A.M. No. 05-8-26-SC)

The investigating judge has no power to reduce or change the crime charged in order to justify the grant of bail to the accused. The power belongs to the prosecutor.

After the conclusion of his PI, the judge has to transmit to the provincial prosecutor his resolution and entire records of the case, regardless of whether he finds a probable cause or sufficient ground to issue a warrant of arrest.

When New Preliminary Investigation if Case is Reinstated

• Original witnesses or some of them recant their testimony, are no longer available (died), or when new witnesses have emerged
• Other persons are charged under the new complaint
• Original charge has been upgraded
• Criminal liability of the accused has been upgraded (ex. accomplice principal) (People v. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, April 1, 2003).

Where a Motion for Reinvestigation is Granted

Where the trial court has granted a motion for reinvestigation, it must hold in abeyance the arraignment and trial of the accused until the prosecutor shall have conducted and made a report on the result of the reinvestigation (People v. Beriales, G.R. No. L-39962. April 7, 1976).