Practice question
After a reasoned Ombudsman probable-cause determination, a petitioner invokes Rule 65 but alleges only that he weighs the disclosed evidence differently. He identifies no arbitrary, capricious, or jurisdictionally abusive exercise of power. Assume no other defect. Which analysis is best?
- Any factual disagreement guarantees the writ.
- The petition must demonstrate the required grave abuse rather than merely seek another ordinary merits evaluation.
- The reviewing court must conduct a full criminal trial within certiorari.
- Every Ombudsman ruling is immune from review even for grave abuse.
- The petitioner wins whenever the underlying allegation is serious.
Legal references
- Piccio v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. E-00224, April 28, 2026, https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/18/70531
- Zamora v. Bautista, G.R. Nos. 272888 and 273014, August 13, 2025, judicial-remedies discussion, https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/aug2025/gr_272888_2025.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.