The Sandiganbayan has lectured and warned lawyers against “forum shopping” or the filing of the same pleading before two different courts in the hope that one court would make a favorable disposition.
Cited in the June 23, 2025 resolution of the anti-graft court was the case of lawyer Jose C. Montemayor Jr., legal counsel of former Camarines Sur Sangguniang Panlalawigan member Nestor Villegas.
In 2018, Villegas was convicted of malversation of public funds for his failure to properly liquidate cash advances amounting to P150,000.
He was sentenced to a prison term ranging from two years, four months and one day to six years and one day. He was also ordered to pay a fine of P150,000.
When Villegas’ motion for reconsideration was denied by the Sandiganbayan, he filed, through his lawyer, a petition for review before the Supreme Court (SC) which denied it in April 2023.
When the SC’s ruling became final, the Sandiganbayan issued an arrest warrant against Villegas.
Undaunted, Villegas, also through lawyer Montemayor, filed a motion to quash arrest before the SC in March 2025 and later filed the same pleading before the anti-graft court.
In the same pleadings, Villegas asked that he be allowed to continue receiving essential medical care and assistance from his family because he was already 72 years old and suffering from multiple life-threatening illnesses.
Due to Montemayor's filing of the same pleadings before the SC and the Sandiganbayan, the anti-graft court directed him to explain whey he should not be cited in contempt for forum shopping.
While Montemayor issued an apology for filing a second motion to quash, the court issued a warning that repetition of the same or similar act will be dealt with more severely.
The Sandiganbayan said that “although lawyers are required to represent their clients with fidelity and zeal, it must always be within the bounds of the law and the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA).
It said it cannot go back to review Villegas' conviction as he failed to show that his medical conditions cannot be managed in the penal institution while he is serving his sentence.
At the same time, it said that the SC ruling is already deemed final.
Here, the Supreme Court's Resolution dated April 26, 2023, denying accused Villegas's Petition for Review and affirming this Court's Decision dated July 27, 2018 became final and executory on July 15, 2024, it added.
The nine-page resolution was written by Sixth Division Chairperson Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez with the concurrence of Associate Justices Kevin Narce B. Vivero and Lord A. Villanueva.