FACTS:

The incident subject of the complaint occurred during the trial of Criminal Case No. 2689-­90-C in the sala of respondent Judge Francisco Ma. Guerrero. Macario A. Agosila, the counsel for the accused, requested for a suspension of the trial in order to have the original of a document photocopied. Instead of granting Agosila's request, respondent Judge declared him in direct contempt of court and ordered his arrest and detention for five hours, later reduced to two hours, in the Calamba Police Station Jail.

Respondent Judge justified his actions by claiming that Agosila's request for a suspension of trial exhibited a lack of preparation and an intention to delay the proceedings. Agosila's mismarking of documentary exhibits and his attention to what the court deemed as irrelevant evidence were also cited as justifications for the contempt citation. Respondent Judge also mentioned other instances of alleged delaying tactics by Agosila in other criminal cases.

In the complaint filed by Chief State Prosecutor Zenon L. De Guia, respondent Judge was accused of gross ignorance of the law and acts that affronted the dignity of Agosila and the office of the Prosecutor. In his defense, respondent Judge argued that his acts were justifiable as an exercise of the court's contempt powers in response to Agosila's refusal to cooperate and display of incompetence.

However, the letter-complaint was found to have merit. The court questioned the logic behind respondent Judge's immediate resort to a direct contempt citation and found no impropriety in Agosila's actions that warranted such citation.

ISSUES:

RULING:

PRINCIPLES:

• The right to ask the court for adjournment or postponement, and much less, a mere continuance or suspension of trial, is well within the prerogative of a counsel handling a case.

• The immediate resort to a direct contempt citation should not be done without proper justification.