CONCHITA C. VALENCIA, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE JOSE MONTEMAYOR, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, ANGELES CITY, RESPONDENT.

On March 20, 1984 Conchita C. Valencia
filed a sworn letter-complaint dated February 23, 1984 in this Court against
Judge Jose G. Montemayor, then Municipal Judge of GuaGua, Pampanga for failure to
decide Criminal Case No. 7878, entitled “People vs. Charlie Ledesma” for serious physical injuries reckless
imprudence, within the 90-day period from the time the case was submitted for
decision.  She alleged that the memorandum for the accused was filed on May 5, 1982, while that for the prosecution was
filed in April, 1982 and that as of the time of the filing of the complaint no
decision had as yet been rendered.

In a first indorsement of March 29, 1984, the deputy court
administrator required respondent Judge to answer said letter-complaint within
ten (10) days from notice.  A first
tracer dated December 6, 1985
of the court administrator was sent to respondent Judge as he had not answered
the complaint as of the said date.

In a letter dated January 3, 1986 respondent judge transmitted to
the court administrator a copy of the decision in the aforestated
case dated June 29, 1984 finding the accused guilty of the crime charged and
imposing on him the indeterminate sentence of imprisonment of two (2) months,
and one (1) day of arresto mayor as
minimum to two (2) years, ten (10) months and twenty (20) days of prision correccional
as maximum.  He submitted no explanation
for the delay in rendering the decision.

Obviously respondent Judge is guilty of violation of Section 5 of
R.A. 296 otherwise known as the Judiciary Act of 1948:  He decided the case only after a lapse of two
(2) years and two (2) months from the time the case was submitted for
decision.  If at all, what may mitigate
his liability is the fact that his regular assignment then was as municipal
Judge in Sta. Rita, Pampanga and he was only
designated as acting municipal
judge of Guagua, Pampanga
in addition to his regular duties on September
20, 1978.  On January 18, 1983, he was appointed as
city judge of Angeles City.

A verification of his disposition of cases as municipal judge of
Sta. Rita, of Guagua and as city judge of Angeles
City shows that he had a fair rate
of disposition of cases except the hereinabove entitled case subject of the
complaint during which period he received his salary regularly.

Nevertheless, respondent judge must be held to account for his
failure to decide aforesaid case within the prescribed period.  It was only after a complaint was filed
against him and the Court pressed him to answer the complaint that he perked up
and decided the case.  His negligence is
far from excusable.

Wherefore, the Court hereby finds respondent Judge Jose Montemayor guilty of the administrative charge against him
for failure to decide Criminal Case No. 7878 within the period provided for under Section 5, R.A. 296 and as penalty he
is hereby imposed a fine of P5,000.00 and further he
is reprimanded with the warning that a repetition of the same or analogous
offense in the future will be more severely dealt with.  Let a copy of this Resolution be attached to
respondent’s personal record.

SO ORDERED.

Fernan, C.J., Narvasa,
Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Feliciano, Gancayco,
Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento,
Cortes, Griño-Aquino, and
Regalado, JJ., concur.

Medialdea,
J., no part.