prev
next
out of 60

crim pro 01-23-15

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    1/60

    Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

    Manila

    EN BANC

    G.R. No. L-53373 June 30, 1987

    MARIO FL. CRESPO, petitioner,vs.

    ON. LEO!EGARIO L. MOGUL, P"e#$%$n& Ju%&e, CIRCUIT CRIMINAL COURT OF LUCENACIT', 9() Ju%$*$+ !$#(., T E PEOPLE OF T E P ILIPPINES, "e "e#en(e% / ()e SOLICITORGENERAL, RICAR!O AUTISTA, ET AL., respondents.

    GANCA'CO,J.:

    The issue raised in this ease is whether the trial court acting on a otion to dis iss a cri inal casefiled b! the Provincial "iscal upon instructions of the #ecretar! of $ustice to who the case waselevated for review, a! refuse to grant the otion and insist on the arraign ent and trial on the

    erits.

    %n April &', &()) Assistant "iscal Proceso *. de +ala with the approval of the Provincial "iscal filedan infor ation for estafa against Mario "l. Crespo in the Circuit Cri inal Court of ucena Cit! whichwas doc-eted as Cri inal Case No. CCC /012 34ue5on6 7)). 1 8hen the case was set for arraig ent the accusedfiled a otion to defer arraign ent on the ground that there was a pending petition for review filed with the #ecretar! of $ustice of theresolution of the %ffice of the Provincial "iscal for the filing of the infor ation. n an order of August &, &()), the presiding 9udge, :is :onor,

    eodegario . Mogul, denied the otion. A otion for reconsideration of the order was denied in the order of August 1, &()) but the arraign ent was deferred to August &', &()) to afford nine for petitioner toelevate the atter to the appellate court. 3

    A petition for certiorari and prohibition with pra!er for a preli inar! writ of in9unction was filed b! theaccused in the Court of Appeals that was doc-eted as CA0+.R. #P No. ;ndersecretar! Macaraig, $r. n an order of August 2, &()'the private prosecutor was given ti e to file an opposition thereto. 10 %n Nove ber 2?, &()' the $udge denied the

    otion and set the arraigni ent stating@

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    2/60

    %R=ER

    "or resolution is a otion to dis iss this rase filed b! the procuting fiscal pre isedon insufficienc! of evidence, as suggested b! the >ndersecretar! of $ustice, evidentfro Anne A of the otion wherein, a ong other things, the "iscal is urged to

    ove for dis issal for the reason that the chec- involved having been issued for thepa! ent of a pre0e isting obligation the :abilit! of the drawer can onl! be civil andnot cri inal.

    The otion7s thrust being to induce this Court to resolve the innocence of theaccused on evidence not before it but on that adduced before the >ndersecretar! of$ustice, a atter that not onl! disregards the re uire ents of due process but alsoerodes the Court7s independence and integrit!, the otion is considered as without

    erit and therefore hereb! =EN E=.

    8:ERE"%RE, let the arraign ent be, as it is hereb! set for =ece ber &', &()' at

    (@;; o7cloc- in the o ing.

    #% %R=ERE=. 11

    The accused then filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and anda us with petition for theissuance of preli inar! writ of prohibition andDor te porar! restraining order in the Court of Appealsthat was doc-eted as CA0+.R. No. #P0;'))). 1 %n $anuar! 2 , &()( a restraining order was issued b! the Court of

    Appeals against the threatened act of arraign ent of the accused until further orders fro the Court. 13 n a decision of %ctober 21, &()(the Court of Appeals dis issed the petition and lifted the restraining order of $anuar! 2 , &()(. 12 A otion for reconsideration of saiddecision filed b! the accused was denied in a resolution of "ebruar! &(, &(';. 15

    :ence this petition for review of said decision was filed b! accused whereb! petitioner pra!s that

    said decision be reversed and set aside, respondent 9udge be perpetuall! en9oined fro enforcinghis threat to proceed with the arraign ent and trial of petitioner in said cri inal case, declaring theinfor ation filed not valid and of no legal force and effect, ordering respondent $udge to dis iss thesaid case, and declaring the obligation of petitioner as purel! civil. 1

    n a resolution of Ma! &(, &(';, the #econd =ivision of this Court without giving due course to thepetition re uired the respondents to co ent to the petition, not to file a otiod to dis iss, withinten 3&;6 da!s fro notice. n the co ent filed b! the #olicitor +eneral he reco ends that thepetition be given due course, it being eritorious. Private respondent through counsel filed his repl!to the co ent and a separate conunent to the petition as-ing that the petition be dis issed. n theresolution of "ebruar! 1, &('&, the #econd =ivision of this Court resolved to transfer this case to the

    Court En Banc . n the resolution of "ebruar! 2

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    3/60

    t is a cardinal principle that an cri inal actions either co enced b! co plaint or b! infor ationshall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the fiscal. 17 The institution of a cri inal action dependsupon the sound discretion of the fiscal. :e a! or a! not file the co plaint or infor ation, follow or not fonow that presented b! theoffended part!, according to whether the evidence in his opinion, is sufficient or not to establish the guilt of the accused be!ond reasonabledoubt. 18 The reason for placing the cri inal prosecution under the direction and control of the fiscal is to prevent alicious or unfounded

    prosecution b! private persons. 19 t cannot be controlled b! the co plainant. 0 Prosecuting officers under the power vested

    in the b! law, not onl! have the authorit! but also the dut! of prosecuting persons who, according to theevidence received fro the co plainant, are shown to be guilt! of a cri e co itted within the 9urisdiction of their office. 1 The! have e uall! the legal dut! not to prosecute when after an investigationthe! beco e convinced that the evidence adduced is not sufficient to establish a prima facie case.

    t is through the conduct of a preli inar! investigation 3 that the fiscal deter ines the e istence of apu a facie case that would warrant the prosecution of a case. The Courts cannot interfere with thefiscal7s discretion and control of the cri inal prosecution. t is not prudent or even per issible for a Courtto co pel the fiscal to prosecute a proceeding originall! initiated b! hi on an infor ation, if he finds thatthe evidence relied upon b! hi is insufficient for conviction. 2 Neither has the Court an! power to orderthe fiscal to prosecute or file an infor ation within a certain period of ti e, since this would interfere withthe fiscal7s discretion and control of cri inal prosecutions. 5 Thus, a fiscal who as-s for the dis issal ofthe case for insufficienc! of evidence has authorit! to do so, and Courts that grant the sa e co it noerror. The fiscal a! re0investigate a case and subse uentl! ove for the dis issal should the re0investigation show either that the defendant is innocent or that his guilt a! not be established be!ondreasonable doubt. 7 n a clash of views between the 9udge who did not investigate and the fiscal who did,or between the fiscal and the offended part! or the defendant, those of the "iscal7s should nor all!prevail. 8 %n the other hand, neither an in9unction, preli inar! or final nor a writ of prohibition a! beissued b! the courts to restrain a cri inal prosecution 9 e cept in the e tre e case where it is necessar!for the Courts to do so for the orderl! ad inistration of 9ustice or to prevent the use of the strong ar ofthe law in an op pressive and vindictive anner. 30

    :owever, the action of the fiscal or prosecutor is not without an! li itation or control. The sa e is

    sub9ect to the approval of the provincial or cit! fiscal or the chief state prosecutor as the case a!beand it a!be elevated for review to the #ecretar! of $ustice who has the power to affir , odif! orreverse the action or opinion of the fiscal. Conse uentl! the #ecretar! of $ustice a! direct that a

    otion to dis iss the rase be filed in Court or otherwise, that an infor ation be filed in Court. 31

    The filing of a co plaint or infor ation in Court initiates a cri inal action. The Court thereb! ac uires 9urisdiction over the case, which is the authorit! to hear and deter ine the case. 3 8hen after thefiling of the co plaint or infor ation a warrant for the arrest of the accused is issued b! the trial court andthe accused either voluntaril! sub ited hi self to the Court or was dul! arrested, the Court thereb!ac uired 9urisdiction over the person of the accused. 33

    The preli inar! investigation conducted b! the fiscal for the purpose of deter ining whether a primafacie case e ists warranting the prosecution of the accused is ter inated upon the filing of theinfor ation in the proper court. n turn, as above stated, the filing of said infor ation sets in otionthe cri inal action against the accused in Court. #hould the fiscal find it proper to conduct areinvestigation of the case, at such stage, the per ission of the Court ust be secured. After suchreinvestigation the finding and reco endations of the fiscal should be sub itted to the Court forappropriate action. 32 8hile it is true that the fiscal has the quasi judicial discretion to deter ine whetheror not a cri inal case should be filed in court or not, once the case had alread! been brought to Court

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    4/60

    whatever disposition the fiscal a! feel should be proper in the rase thereafter should be addressed forthe consideration of the Court, 35 The onl! ualification is that the action of the Court ust not i pair thesubstantial rights of the accused. 3 or the right of the People to due process of law. 3 +

    8hether the accused had been arraigned or not and whether it was due to a reinvestigation b! thefiscal or a review b! the #ecretar! of $ustice whereb! a otion to dis iss was sub itted to theCourt, the Court in the e ercise of its discretion a! grant the otion or den! it and re uire that thetrial on the erits proceed for the proper deter ination of the case.

    :owever, one a! as-, if the trial court refuses to grant the otion to dis iss filed b! the fiscal uponthe directive of the #ecretar! of $ustice will there not be a vacuu in the prosecutionF A stateprosecutor to handle the case cannot possibl! be designated b! the #ecretar! of $ustice who doesnot believe that there is a basis for prosecution nor can the fiscal be e pected to handle theprosecution of the case thereb! def!ing the superior order of the #ecretar! of $ustice.

    The answer is si ple. The role of the fiscal or prosecutor as 8e all -now is to see that 9ustice isdone and not necessaril! to secure the conviction of the person accused before the Courts. Thus, inspite of his opinion to the contrar!, it is the dut! of the fiscal to proceed with the presentation ofevidence of the prosecution to the Court to enable the Court to arrive at its own independent

    9udg ent as to whether the accused should be convicted or ac uitted. The fiscal should not shir-fro the responsibilit! of appearing for the People of the Philippines even under such circu stances

    uch less should he abandon the prosecution of the case leaving it to the hands of a privateprosecutor for then the entire proceedings will be null and void. 37 The least that the fiscal should do isto continue to appear for the prosecution although he a! turn over the presentation of the evidence tothe private prosecutor but still under his direction and control. 38

    The rule therefore in this 9urisdiction is that once a co plaint or infor ation is filed in Court an!disposition of the case as its dis issal or the conviction or ac uittal of the accused rests in thesound discretion of the Court. Although the fiscal retains the direction and control of the prosecutionof cri inal cases even while the case is alread! in Court he cannot i pose his opinion on the trialcourt. The Court is the best and sole 9udge on what to do with the case before it. The deter inationof the case is within its e clusive 9urisdiction and co petence. A otion to dis iss the case filed b!the fiscal should be addressed to the Court who has the option to grant or den! the sa e. t doesnot atter if this is done before or after the arraign ent of the accused or that the otion was filedafter a reinvestigation or upon instructions of the #ecretar! of $ustice who reviewed the records ofthe investigation.

    n order therefor to avoid such a situation whereb! the opinion of the #ecretar! of $ustice whoreviewed the action of the fiscal a! be disregarded b! the trial court, the #ecretar! of $usticeshould, as far as practicable, refrain fro entertaining a petition for review or appeal fro the actionof the fiscal, when the co plaint or infor ation has alread! been filed in Court. The atter should beleft entirel! for the deter ination of the Court.

    8:ERE"%RE, the petition is = #M ##E= for lac- of erit without pronounce ent as to costs.

    #% %R=ERE=.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    5/60

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    6/60

    THIRD DIVISION

    AURELIO M. SIERRA, Complainant,

    - vers s -

    !HOSE" #. LO"E$, Cit% "rose& tor o' Manila, EU(ROCINO SULLA, )st Assistant Cit%"rose& tor *AC"+, AC" ALE ANDER T. #A", AC" MARLO CAM"ANILLA, an AC"ARMANDO VELASCO, Respon ents.

    A m. Case No. /01

    "rom l2ate 3 A 2 st 41, 4556

    7------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7

    DECISION

    NACHURA, !.3

    T8e instant &ontrovers% arose 'rom a &omplaint 'or ereli&tion o' t% an2ross i2noran&e o' t8e la9 :% A relio M. Sierra a2ainst Cit% "rose& tor o' Manila

    !8osep #. Lope;, )st Assistant Cit% "rose& tor *AC"+ E 'ro&ino S lla, Assistant Cit%"rose& tors Ale7an er #ap, Marlo Campanilla an Arman o Velas&o.

    T8e 'a&ts o' t8e &ase are as 'ollo9s3

    On ! l% 4 , 455< an A 2 st ), 455

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    7/60

    a'ternoon. In t8e &ase o' ?eor2e S.@. T% an Mr. Ca%a:an, t8eir respe&tive &o nter-a> avits 9ere s :mitte :% t8eir la9%ers rin2 t8e s&8e le 8earin2 in t8ea'ternoon, alrea % s :s&ri:e an s9orn to :e'ore a "asi2 "rose& tor. Att%.Leonar o i not s :mit an% &o nter-a> avit.

    Be&a se o' AC" #ap s 'ail re to re ire t8e presen&e o' respon ents in sai&ases sim ltaneo sl% 9it8 t8e &omplainant, Mr. Sierra as e 'or t8e prose& tor sin8i:ition. T8e &ases 9ere t8en re-ra e to t8e respon ent AC" Marlo Campanilla98o li e9ise i not re ire t8e presen&e o' t8e respon ents in t8e preliminar%investi2ation. Be&a se o' t8is, 8e too 9as as e to in8i:it 'rom t8e &ases :%&omplainant.

    T8e &ases 9ere t8en re-ra e to AC" Arman o Velas&o 98o also 8an le t8e&ases in t8e same manner as t8e t9o ot8er prose& tors :e'ore 8im. Cit%"rose& tor !8osep #. Lope; an )st AC" E 'ro&ino A. S lla a>rme t8e &orre&tness o' t8e manner in 98i&8 t8eir investi2atin2 prose& tors 8an le t8e &ases.

    On April 4 avits o' t8e respon ents s8o l :e s9ornto onl% :e'ore t8e investi2atin2 prose& torF an *G+ 98et8er t8e investi2atin2prose& tor erre in en%in2 t8e re est o' t8e &omplainant 'or &lari=&ator%

    estionin2.

    T8e S preme Co rt T8ir Division t8en iss e a Resol tion ate ! l% 4/,4556 re irin2 respon ents to &omment on t8e &omplaint.

    In &omplian&e 9it8 t8e Honora:le Co rt s or er, respon ents =le t8eirComment ate Mar&8 , 4556 statin2 t8at t8e% 8an le t8e &ases properl% an ina&&or an&e 9it8 98at 9as provi e :% la9. T8e% also ar2 e t8at t8e% 8a not&ommitte an% ereli&tion o' t% an 2ross i2noran&e o' t8e la9.

    e =n no merit in t8e &omplaint.

    R le ))4, parti& larl% Se&tion G o' t8e R les o' Co rt, la%s o9n t8e:asi& pro&e re in preliminar% investi2ation, as 'ollo9s3

    Se&. G. "ro&e re. T8e preliminar% investi2ation s8all :e &on &te in t8e'ollo9in2 manner3

    *a+ T8e &omplaint s8all state t8e a ress o' t8e respon ent an s8all:e a&&ompanie :% t8e a> avits o' t8e &omplainant an 8is 9itnesses, as 9ell asot8er s pportin2 o& ments to esta:lis8 pro:a:le &a se. T8e% s8all :e in s &8

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    8/60

    n m:er o' &opies as t8ere are respon ents, pl s t9o *4+ &opies 'or t8e o>&ial =le. T8e a> avits s8all :e s :s&ri:e an s9orn to :e'ore an% prose& tor or2overnment o>&ial a t8ori;e to a minister oat8, or, in t8eir a:sen&e or

    navaila:ilit%, :e'ore a notar% p :li&, ea&8 o' 98om m st &erti'% t8at 8e personall%e7amine t8e a>ants an t8at 8e is satis=e t8at t8e% vol ntaril% e7e& te an

    n erstoo t8eir a> avits.

    *:+ it8in ten *)5+ a%s a'ter t8e =lin2 o' t8e &omplaint, t8einvesti2atin2 o>&er s8all eit8er ismiss it i' 8e =n s no 2ro n to &ontin e 9it8 t8einvesti2ation, or iss e a s :poena to t8e respon ent atta&8in2 to it a &op% o' t8e&omplaint an its s pportin2 a> avits an o& ments.

    T8e respon ent s8all 8ave t8e ri28t to e7amine t8e evi en&e s :mitte :%t8e &omplainant 98i&8 8e ma% not 8ave :een ' rnis8e an to &op% t8em at 8ise7pense. I' t8e evi en&e is vol mino s, t8e &omplainant ma% :e re ire to spe&i'%t8ose 98i&8 8e inten s to present a2ainst t8e respon ent, an t8ese s8all :e ma e

    availa:le 'or e7amination or &op%in2 :% t8e respon ent at 8is e7pense.

    O:Je&ts as evi en&e nee not :e ' rnis8e a part% : t s8all :e ma eavaila:le 'or e7amination, &op%in2, or p8oto2rap8in2 at t8e e7pense o' t8ere estin2 part%.

    *&+ it8in ten *)5+ a%s 'rom re&eipt o' t8e s :poena 9it8 t8e&omplaint an s pportin2 a> avits an o& ments, t8e respon ent s8all s :mit 8is&o nter-a> avit an t8at o' 8is 9itnesses an ot8er s pportin2 o& ments relie

    pon 'or 8is e'ense. T8e &o nter-a> avits, s8all :e s :s&ri:e an s9orn to an&erti=e as provi e in para2rap8 *a+ o' t8is se&tion, 9it8 &opies t8ereo' ' rnis8e

    :% 8im to t8e &omplainant. T8e respon ent s8all not :e allo9e to =le a motion toismiss in lie o' a &o nter-a> avit.

    * + I' t8e respon ent &annot :e s :poenae , or i' s :poenae , oesnot s :mit &o nter-a> avits 9it8in t8e ten *)5+ a% perio , t8e investi2atin2 o>&ers8all resolve t8e &omplaint :ase on t8e evi en&e presente :% t8e &omplainant.

    *e+ T8e investi2atin2 o>&er ma% set a 8earin2 i' t8ere are 'a&ts aniss es to :e &lari=e 'rom a part% or a 9itness. T8e parties &an :e present at t8e8earin2 : t 9it8o t t8e ri28t to e7amine or &ross-e7amine. T8e% ma%, 8o9ever,s :mit to t8e investi2atin2 o>&er estions 98i&8 ma% :e as e to t8e part% or

    9itness &on&erne .

    T8e 8earin2 s8all :e 8el 9it8in ten *)5+ a%s 'rom s :mission o' t8e&o nter-a> avits an ot8er o& ments or 'rom t8e e7piration o' t8e perio 'or t8eirs :mission. It s8all :e terminate 9it8in =ve */+ a%s.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    9/60

    *'+ it8in ten *)5+ a%s a'ter t8e investi2ation, t8e investi2atin2 o>&ers8all etermine 98et8er or not t8ere is s >&ient 2ro n to 8ol t8e respon ent 'ortrial.

    T8is provision o' t8e R les oes not re ire a &on'rontation :et9een t8eparties. "reliminar% investi2ation is or inaril% &on &te t8ro 28 s :mission o'a> avits an s pportin2 o& ments, t8ro 28 t8e e7&8an2e o' plea in2s.

    In Ro is, Sr. v. San i2an:a%anK) 9e r le t8at - *t8e Ne9 R les on Criminal"ro&e re+ o not re ire as a &on ition sine a non to t8e vali it% o' t8epro&ee in2s * in t8e preliminar% investi2ation+ t8e presen&e o' t8e a&& se 'or aslon2 as e orts to rea&8 8im 9ere ma e, an an opport nit% to &ontrovert evi en&eo' t8e &omplainant is a&&or e 8im. T8e o:vio s p rpose o' t8e r le is to :lo&attempts o' ns&r p lo s respon ents to t89art t8e prose& tion o' o enses :%8i in2 t8emselves or :% emplo%in2 ilator% ta&ti&s.

    Sin&e &on'rontation :et9een t8e parties is not imperative, it 'ollo9s t8at it is notne&essar% t8at t8e &o nter-a> avit o' respon ent :e s9orn to :e'ore t8einvesti2atin2 prose& tor 8imsel'. It &an :e s9orn to :e'ore anot8er prose& tor. In'a&t, t8is is spe&i=&all% provi e in para2rap8 *&+ o' Se&. G, 98i&8 states t8at t8e

    &o nter-a> avit s8all :e s :s&ri:e an s9orn to an &erti=e as provi e inpara2rap8 *a+ o' t8is se&tion 7 7 7 F an para2rap8 *a+, provi es3 t8e a> avits s8all:e s :s&ri:e an s9orn to :e'ore an% prose& tor or 2overnment o>&ial or in t8eira:sen&e or navaila:ilit%, :e'ore a notar% p :li& 7 7 7.

    Lastl%, 9e 8ol t8at t8e investi2atin2 prose& tors i not a: se t8eiris&retion 98en t8e% enie t8e re est o' t8e &omplainant 'or t8e &on &t o'

    &lari=&ator% estionin2. Un er para2rap8 *e+ o' Se&tion G a:ove, t8e &on &t o'&lari=&ator% estionin2 is is&retionar% pon t8e prose& tor. In ee , 9e alrea %8el in e:: v. De LeonK4 t8at t8e e&ision to &all 9itnesses 'or &lari=&ator%

    estions is a resse to t8e so n is&retion o' t8e investi2ator, an t8einvesti2ator alone.

    HERE(ORE, premises &onsi ere , t8e &omplaint is DENIED 'or la& o' merit.

    SO ORDERED.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    10/60

    Rep :li& o' t8e "8ilippines

    S preme Co rt

    Manila

    THIRD DIVISION

    ?.R. NO. )/ 0 4

    SS?T. !OSE M. "ACO#, "etitioner,

    - vers s

    HON. A(ABLE E. CA!I?AL,

    "EO"LE O( THE "HILI""INESan OL#M"IO L. ESCUETA, "rom l2ate 3

    Respon ents. Septem:er 46, 455

    7- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7

    D E C I S I O N

    AUSTRIA-MARTINE$, !.3

    Be'ore s is a "etition 'or Certiorari n er R le

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    11/60

    8ittin2 an s stainin2 pon 4Lt. (re eri& Es ita m ltiple 2 ns8ot 9o n s on 8is:o % 98i&8 &a se 8is instantaneo s eat8.

    it8 t8e a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e o' illin2, 4Lt. (re eri& Es ita in isre2ar o'8is ran .K0

    On Septem:er )4, 4554, pon arrai2nment, petitioner, l% assiste :%&o nsel e parte, plea e not 2 ilt% to t8e &8ar2e o' Homi&i e. Respon ent ! 2eset t8e pre-trial &on'eren&e an trial on O&to:er 6, 4554.K/

    Ho9ever, on t8e same a% an a'ter t8e arrai2nment, t8e respon ent J 2eiss e anot8er Or er,K< li e9ise ate Septem:er )4, 4554, ire&tin2 t8e trialprose& tor to &orre&t an amen t8e In'ormation to M r er in vie9 o' t8ea22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e o' isre2ar o' ran alle2e in t8e In'ormation 98i&8p :li& respon ent re2istere as 8avin2 ali=e t8e &rime to M r er.

    A&tin2 pon s &8 Or er, t8e prose& tor entere 8is amen ment :% &rossin2o t t8e 9or Homi&i e an instea 9rote t8e 9or M r er in t8e &aption an int8e openin2 para2rap8 o' t8e In'ormation. T8e a&& sator% portion remaine e7a&tl%t8e same as t8at o' t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'or Homi&i e, 9it8 t8e &orre&tion o' t8espellin2 o' t8e vi&tim s name 'rom Es& ita to Es& eta. K

    On O&to:er 6, 4554, t8e ate s&8e le 'or pre-trial &on'eren&e an trial,petitioner 9as to :e re-arrai2ne 'or t8e &rime o' M r er. Co nsel 'or petitionero:Je&te on t8e 2ro n t8at t8e latter 9o l :e pla&e in o :le Jeopar %,&onsi erin2 t8at 8is Homi&i e &ase 8a :een terminate 9it8o t 8is e7press&onsent, res ltin2 in t8e ismissal o' t8e &ase. As petitioner re' se to enter 8isplea on t8e amen e In'ormation 'or M r er, t8e p :li& respon ent entere 'or 8ima plea o' not 2 ilt%.K6

    On O&to:er 46, 4554, petitioner =le a Motion to Q as8 9it8 Motion toS spen "ro&ee in2s "en in2 t8e Resol tion o' t8e Instant MotionK1 on t8e 2ro no' o :le Jeopar %. "etitioner alle2e t8at in t8e In'ormation 'or Homi&i e, 8e 9asvali l% in i&te an arrai2ne :e'ore a &ompetent &o rt, an t8e &ase 9asterminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsentF t8at 98en t8e &ase 'or Homi&i e 9asterminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent, t8e s :se ent =lin2 o' t8e In'ormation 'orM r er in lie o' Homi&i e pla&e 8im in o :le Jeopar %.

    In an Or erK)5 ate O&to:er 4/, 4554,K)) t8e respon ent J 2e eniet8e Motion to Q as8. He r le t8at a &laim o' 'ormer a& ittal or &onvi&tion oesnot &onstit te o :le Jeopar % an &annot :e s staine nless J 2ment 9asren ere a& ittin2 or &onvi&tin2 t8e e'en ant in t8e 'ormer prose& tionF t8atpetitioner 9as never a& itte or &onvi&te o' Homi&i e, sin&e t8e In'ormation 'orHomi&i e 9as merel% &orre&te or amen e :e'ore trial &ommen&e an i not

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    12/60

    terminate t8e sameF t8at t8e In'ormation 'or Homi&i e 9as patentl% ins >&ient ins :stan&e, so no vali pro&ee in2s &o l :e ta en t8ereonF an t8at 9it8 t8ealle2ation o' a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e o' isre2ar o' ran , t8e &rime o'Homi&i e is ali=e to M r er.

    "etitioner =le a Motion to In8i:it 9it8 atta&8e Motion 'or Re&onsi eration. In8is Motion to In8i:it, 8e alle2e t8at t8e respon ent J 2e e7er&ise J ris i&tion inan ar:itrar%, &apri&io s an partial manner in man atin2 t8e amen ment o' t8e&8ar2e 'rom Homi&i e to M r er in isre2ar o' t8e provisions o' t8e la9 ane7istin2 J rispr en&e.

    In 8is Motion 'or Re&onsi eration, petitioner reiterate t8at t8e &ase a2ainst8im 9as ismisse or ot8er9ise terminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent, 98i&8&onstit tes a 2ro n to as8 t8e in'ormation 'or m r erF an t8at to tr% 8im a2ain'or t8e same o ense &onstit tes o :le Jeopar %. "etitioner state t8at &ontrar% torespon ent J 2e s &on&l sion t8at isre2ar o' ran ali=es t8e illin2 to M r er,

    it is a 2eneri& a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e 98i&8 onl% serves to a e&t t8e impositiono' t8e perio o' t8e penalt%. "etitioner also ar2 e t8at t8e amen ment an or&orre&tion or ere :% t8e respon ent J 2e 9as s :stantialF an n er Se&tion )0,R le ))5 o' t8e Revise R les o' Criminal "ro&e re, t8is &annot :e one, sin&epetitioner 8a alrea % :een arrai2ne an 8e 9o l :e pla&e in o :le Jeopar %.

    In 8is Or er ate De&em:er )6, 4554,K)4 t8e respon ent J 2e enie t8eMotion to In8i:it an 2rante t8e Motion 'or Re&onsi eration, t8 s3

    HERE(ORE, in vie9 o' t8e 'ore2oin2, t8e Motion to In8i:it is 8ere:% DENIED 98ilet8e Motion 'or Re&onsi eration is 8ere:% ?RANTED.

    Unless or ere ot8er9ise :% t8e Hi28est Co rt, t8e presi in2 J 2e s8all &ontin e8earin2 t8is &ase. ( rt8er, t8e Or er ate O&to:er 4/, 4554 is re&onsi ere ant8e ori2inal in'ormation &8ar2in2 t8e &rime o' 8omi&i e stan s.K)G

    In 2rantin2 t8e Motion 'or Re&onsi eration, respon ent J 2e 'o n t8at a&lose s&r tin% o' Arti&le 406 o' t8e Revise "enal Co e s8o9s t8at isre2ar o'ran is merel% a 2eneri& miti2atin2K)0 &ir& mstan&e 98i&8 s8o l not elevate t8e&lassi=&ation o' t8e &rime o' 8omi&i e to m r er.

    On April G5, 455G, petitioner =le 8erein petition 'or &ertiorari on t8e 'ollo9in22ro n s3

    THE RES"ONDENT !UD?E ?RAVEL# ABUSED HIS DISCRETION AND E CEEDED HIS !URISDICTION IN ORDERIN? THE AMENDMENT O( THE IN(ORMATION (ROMHOMICIDE TO MURDER.

    THE RES"ONDENT !UD?E ?RAVEL# ABUSED HIS DISCRETION AND VIOLATED THELA IN DEN#IN? THE MOTION TO QUASH THE IN(ORMATION (OR MURDER.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    13/60

    THE RES"ONDENT !UD?E ?RAVEL# ABUSED HIS DISCRETION AND E CEEDED HIS !URISDICTION AND VIOLATED THE LA IN ORDERIN? THE REINSTATEMENT O( THEIN(ORMATION (OR HOMICIDE HICH AS ALREAD# TERMINATED.K)/

    "etitioner alle2es t8at espite 8avin2 entere 8is plea o' not 2 ilt% to t8e&8ar2e o' Homi&i e, t8e p :li& respon ent or ere t8e amen ment o' t8eIn'ormation 'rom Homi&i e to M r er :e&a se o' t8e presen&e o' t8e a22ravatin2&ir& mstan&e o' isre2ar o' ran , 98i&8 is in violation o' Se&tion )0, R le ))5 o't8e Revise R les o' Criminal "ro&e reF t8at t8e p :li& respon ent s r lin2 t8at

    isre2ar o' ran is a ali'%in2 a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e 98i&8 ali=e t8eillin2 o' 4Lt. Es& eta to m r er is erroneo s sin&e, n er para2rap8 G, Arti&le )0 o'

    t8e Revise "enal Co e, isre2ar o' ran is onl% a 2eneri& a22ravatin2&ir& mstan&e 98i&8 serves to a e&t t8e penalt% to :e impose pon t8e a&& sean oes not ali'% t8e o ense into a more serio s &rimeF t8at even ass min2 t8at

    isre2ar o' ran is a ali'%in2 a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e, s &8 is a s :stantialamen ment 98i&8 is not allo9e a'ter petitioner 8as entere 8is plea.

    "etitioner ne7t &onten s t8at t8e respon ent J 2e 2ravel% a: se 8isis&retion 98en 8e enie t8e Motion to Q as8 t8e In'ormation 'or M r er,

    &onsi erin2 t8at t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'or Homi&i e =le a2ainst 8im 9asterminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsentF t8 s, prose& tin2 8im 'or t8e same o ense9o l pla&e 8im in o :le Jeopar %.

    "etitioner ' rt8er ar2 es t8at alt8o 28 t8e respon ent J 2e 2rante 8isMotion 'or Re&onsi eration, 8e i not in 'a&t 2rant t8e motion, sin&e petitioner s

    pra%er 9as 'or t8e respon ent J 2e to 2rant t8e Motion to Q as8 t8e In'ormation'or M r er on t8e 2ro n o' o :le Jeopar %F t8at 8is Motion 'or Re&onsi eration inot see t8e reinstatement o' t8e In'ormation 'or Homi&i e pon t8e ismissal o't8e In'ormation 'or M r er, as 8e 9o l a2ain :e pla&e in o :le Jeopar %F t8 s,t8e respon ent J 2e &ommitte 2rave a: se o' is&retion in reinstatin2 t8eHomi&i e &ase.

    In 8is Comment, t8e Soli&itor ?eneral ar2 es t8at t8e respon ent J 2e sOr er reinstatin2 t8e In'ormation to Homi&i e a'ter initiall% mot proprio or erin2 itsamen ment to M r er ren ers 8erein petition moot an a&a emi&F t8at petitioner'aile to esta:lis8 t8e 'o rt8 element o' o :le Jeopar %, i.e., t8e e'en ant 9asa& itte or &onvi&te , or t8e &ase a2ainst 8im 9as ismisse or ot8er9iseterminate 9it8o t 8is &onsentF t8at petitioner &on' ses amen ment 9it8s :stit tion o' In'ormationF t8at t8e respon ent J 2e s Or er ate Septem:er )4,4554 man ate an amen ment o' t8e In'ormation as provi e n er Se&tion )0,R le ))5 o' t8e Revise R les o' Criminal "ro&e reF an t8at amen ments o notentail ismissal or termination o' t8e previo s &ase.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    14/60

    "rivate respon ent Col. Olimpio Es& eta, 'at8er o' t8e vi&tim, =le 8isComment alle2in2 t8at no 2rave a: se o' is&retion 9as &ommitte :% t8erespon ent J 2e 98en 8e enie petitioner s Motion to Q as8 t8e Amen eIn'ormation, as petitioner 9as not pla&e in o :le Jeopar %F t8at t8e pro&ee in2s

    n er t8e =rst In'ormation 'or 8omi&i e 8as not %et &ommen&e , an t8e &ase 9as

    not ismisse or terminate 98en t8e In'ormation 9as amen e .

    In 8is Repl%, petitioner reiterates 8is &ontention t8at t8e amen ment o' t8e&8ar2e o' Homi&i e to M r er a'ter 8is arrai2nment 9o l pla&e 8im in o :le

    Jeopar %, &onsi erin2 t8at sai amen ment 9as 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsentF ant8at s &8 amen ment 9as tantamo nt to a termination o' t8e &8ar2e o' Homi&i e.

    T8e parties =le t8eir respe&tive Memoran a.

    ?enerall%, a ire&t resort to s in a petition 'or &ertiorari is 8i28l% improper,'or it violates t8e esta:lis8e poli&% o' stri&t o:servan&e o' t8e J i&ial 8ierar&8% o'&o rts. Ho9ever, t8e J i&ial 8ierar&8% o' &o rts is not an iron-&la r le.K)< A stri&tappli&ation o' t8e r le o' 8ierar&8% o' &o rts is not ne&essar% 98en t8e &ases:ro 28t :e'ore t8e appellate &o rts o not involve 'a&t al : t le2al estions.K)

    In t8e present &ase, petitioner s :mits p re estions o' la9 involvin2 t8eproper le2al interpretation o' t8e provisions on amen ment an s :stit tion o'in'ormation n er t8e R les o' Co rt. It also involves t8e iss e o' o :le Jeopar %,one o' t8e ' n amental ri28ts o' t8e &iti;ens n er t8e Constit tion 98i&8 prote&tst8e a&& se not a2ainst t8e peril o' se&on p nis8ment : t a2ainst :ein2 trie 'ort8e same o ense. T8ese important le2al estions an in or er to prevent ' rt8er

    ela% in t8e trial o' t8e &ase 9arrant o r rela7ation o' t8e poli&% o' stri&t o:servan&e

    o' t8e J i&ial 8ierar&8% o' &o rts.

    T8e Co rt s R lin2

    T8e petition is not meritorio s.

    e =n no merit in petitioner s &ontention t8at t8e respon ent J 2e&ommitte 2rave a: se o' is&retion in amen in2 t8e In'ormation a'ter petitioner8a alrea % plea e not 2 ilt% to t8e &8ar2e in t8e In'ormation 'or Homi&i e. T8ear2 ment o' petitioner --

    Consi erin2 t8e 'a&t t8at t8e &ase 'or Homi&i e a2ainst 8im 9as alrea %terminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent, 8e &annot an%more :e &8ar2e anarrai2ne 'or M r er 98i&8 involve t8e same o ense. T8e petitioner ar2 e t8att8e termination o' t8e in'ormation 'or Homi&i e 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent ise ivalent to 8is a& ittal. T8 s, to &8ar2e 8im a2ain, t8is time 'or M r er, istantamo nt to pla&in2 t8e petitioner in Do :le !eopar %.

    is not pla si:le. "etitioner &on' ses t8e pro&e re an e e&ts o' amen ment ors :stit tion n er Se&tion )0, R le ))5 o' t8e R les o' Co rt, to 9it --

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    15/60

    SEC. )0. Amen ment or s :stit tion. A &omplaint or in'ormation ma% :eamen e , in 'orm or in s :stan&e, 9it8o t leave o' &o rt, at an% time :e'ore t8ea&& se enters 8is plea. A'ter t8e plea an rin2 t8e trial, a 'ormal amen mentma% onl% :e ma e 9it8 leave o' &o rt an 98en it &an :e one 9it8o t &a sin2preJ i&e to t8e ri28ts o' t8e a&& se .

    7 7 7

    I' it appears at an% time :e'ore J 2ment t8at a mista e 8as :eenma e in &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense, t8e &o rt s8all ismiss t8e ori2inal &omplaintor in'ormation pon t8e =lin2 o' a ne9 one &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense ina&&or an&e 9it8 R le ))1, Se&tion )), provi e t8e a&& se 9o l not :e pla&et8ere:% in o :le Jeopar %, an ma% also re ire t8e 9itnesses to 2ive :ail 'or t8eirappearan&e at t8e trial.

    9it8 Se&tion )1, R le ))1 o' 98i&8 provi es3

    SEC. )1. 8en mista e 8as :een ma e in &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense. - 8en it:e&omes mani'est at an% time :e'ore J 2ment t8at a mista e 8as :een ma e in&8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense an t8e a&& se &annot :e &onvi&te o' t8e o ense&8ar2e or an% ot8er o ense ne&essaril% in&l e t8erein, t8e a&& se s8all not :e

    is&8ar2e i' t8ere appears 2oo &a se to etain 8im. In s &8 &ase, t8e &o rt s8all&ommit t8e a&& se to ans9er 'or t8e proper o ense an ismiss t8e ori2inal &ase

    pon t8e =lin2 o' t8e proper in'ormation.

    (irst, a istin&tion s8all :e ma e :et9een amen ment an s :stit tion n erSe&tion )0, R le ))5. (or t8is p rpose, Tee8an ee v. Ma a%a2K)1 is instr &tive, vi;3

    T8e =rst para2rap8 provi es t8e r les 'or amen ment o' t8e in'ormation or&omplaint, 98ile t8e se&on para2rap8 re'ers to t8e s :stit tion o' t8e in'ormationor &omplaint.

    It ma% a&&or in2l% :e posite t8at :ot8 amen ment an s :stit tion o' t8ein'ormation ma% :e ma e :e'ore or a'ter t8e e'en ant plea s, : t t8e% i er int8e 'ollo9in2 respe&ts3

    ). Amen ment ma% involve eit8er 'ormal or s :stantial &8an2es, 98ile s :stit tionne&essaril% involves a s :stantial &8an2e 'rom t8e ori2inal &8ar2eF

    4. Amen ment :e'ore plea 8as :een entere &an :e e e&te 9it8o t leave o'&o rt, : t s :stit tion o' in'ormation m st :e 9it8 leave o' &o rt as t8e ori2inalin'ormation 8as to :e ismisse F

    G. 8ere t8e amen ment is onl% as to 'orm, t8ere is no nee 'or anot8erpreliminar% investi2ation an t8e reta in2 o' t8e plea o' t8e a&& se F ins :stit tion o' in'ormation, anot8er preliminar% investi2ation is entaile an t8ea&& se 8as to plea ane9 to t8e ne9 in'ormationF an

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    16/60

    0. An amen e in'ormation re'ers to t8e same o ense &8ar2e in t8e ori2inalin'ormation or to an o ense 98i&8 ne&essaril% in&l es or is ne&essaril% in&l e int8e ori2inal &8ar2e, 8en&e s :stantial amen ments to t8e in'ormation a'ter t8e plea8as :een ta en &annot :e ma e over t8e o:Je&tion o' t8e a&& se , 'or i' t8e ori2inalin'ormation 9o l :e 9it8 ra9n, t8e a&& se &o l invo e o :le Jeopar %. On t8e

    ot8er 8an , s :stit tion re ires or pres pposes t8at t8e ne9 in'ormation involvesa i erent o ense 98i&8 oes not in&l e or is not ne&essaril% in&l e in t8eori2inal &8ar2e, 8en&e t8e a&& se &annot &laim o :le Jeopar %.

    In eterminin2, t8ere'ore, 98et8er t8ere s8o l :e an amen ment n er t8e =rstpara2rap8 o' Se&tion )0, R le ))5, or a s :stit tion o' in'ormation n er t8e se&onpara2rap8 t8ereo', t8e r le is t8at 98ere t8e se&on in'ormation involves t8e sameo ense, or an o ense 98i&8 ne&essaril% in&l es or is ne&essaril% in&l e in t8e=rst in'ormation, an amen ment o' t8e in'ormation is s >&ientF ot8er9ise, 98eret8e ne9 in'ormation &8ar2es an o ense 98i&8 is istin&t an i erent 'rom t8atinitiall% &8ar2e , a s :stit tion is in or er.

    T8ere is i entit% :et9een t8e t9o o enses 98en t8e evi en&e to s pport a&onvi&tion 'or one o ense 9o l :e s >&ient to 9arrant a &onvi&tion 'or t8e ot8er,or 98en t8e se&on o ense is e7a&tl% t8e same as t8e =rst, or 98en t8e se&ono ense is an attempt to &ommit or a 'r stration o', or 98en it ne&essaril% in&l esor is ne&essaril% in&l e in, t8e o ense &8ar2e in t8e =rst in'ormation. In t8is&onne&tion, an o ense ma% :e sai to ne&essaril% in&l e anot8er 98en some o't8e essential elements or in2re ients o' t8e 'ormer, as t8is is alle2e in t8ein'ormation, &onstit te t8e latter. An , vi&e-versa, an o ense ma% :e sai to :ene&essaril% in&l e in anot8er 98en t8e essential in2re ients o' t8e 'ormer&onstit te or 'orm a part o' t8ose &onstit tin2 t8e latter.K45

    In t8e present &ase, t8e &8an2e o' t8e o ense &8ar2e 'rom Homi&i e to M r er ismerel% a 'ormal amen ment an not a s :stantial amen ment or a s :stit tion as

    e=ne in Tee8an ee.

    8ile t8e amen e In'ormation 9as 'or M r er, a rea in2 o' t8e In'ormations8o9s t8at t8e onl% &8an2e ma e 9as in t8e &aption o' t8e &aseF an in t8e openin2para2rap8 or pream:le o' t8e In'ormation, 9it8 t8e &rossin2 o t o' 9or Homi&i ean its repla&ement :% t8e 9or M r er. T8ere 9as no &8an2e in t8e re&ital o''a&ts &onstit tin2 t8e o ense &8ar2e or in t8e etermination o' t8e J ris i&tion o't8e &o rt. T8e averments in t8e amen e In'ormation 'or M r er are e7a&tl% t8esame as t8ose alrea % alle2e in t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'or Homi&i e, as t8ere9as not at all an% &8an2e in t8e a&t imp te to petitioner, i.e., t8e illin2 o' 4Lt.Es& eta 9it8o t an% ali'%in2 &ir& mstan&e. T8 s, 9e =n t8at t8e amen mentma e in t8e &aption an pream:le 'rom Homi&i e to M r er as p rel% 'ormal.K4)

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    17/60

    Se&tion )0, R le ))5 also provi es t8at in allo9in2 'ormal amen ments in&ases in 98i&8 t8e a&& se 8as alrea % plea e , it is ne&essar% t8at t8eamen ments o not preJ i&e t8e ri28ts o' t8e a&& se . T8e test o' 98et8er t8eri28ts o' an a&& se are preJ i&e :% t8e amen ment o' a &omplaint or in'ormationis 98et8er a e'ense n er t8e &omplaint or in'ormation, as it ori2inall% stoo ,

    9o l no lon2er :e availa:le a'ter t8e amen ment is ma eF an 98en an% evi en&et8e a&& se mi28t 8ave 9o l :e inappli&a:le to t8e &omplaint or in'ormation.K44Sin&e t8e 'a&ts alle2e in t8e a&& sator% portion o' t8e amen e In'ormation arei enti&al 9it8 t8ose o' t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'or Homi&i e, t8ere &o l not :e an%e e&t on t8e prose& tion s t8eor% o' t8e &aseF neit8er 9o l t8ere :e an% possi:lepreJ i&e to t8e ri28ts or e'ense o' petitioner.

    8ile t8e respon ent J 2e erroneo sl% t8o 28t t8at isrespe&t on a&&o nto' ran ali=e t8e &rime to m r er, as t8e same 9as onl% a 2eneri& a22ravatin2&ir& mstan&e,K4G 9e o not =n t8at 8e &ommitte an% 2rave a: se o' is&retionin or erin2 t8e amen ment o' t8e In'ormation a'ter petitioner 8a alrea % plea enot 2 ilt% to t8e &8ar2e o' Homi&i e, sin&e t8e amen ment ma e 9as onl% 'ormalan i not a versel% a e&t an% s :stantial ri28t o' petitioner.

    Ne7t, 9e etermine 98et8er petitioner 9as pla&e in o :le Jeopar % :% t8e&8an2e o' t8e &8ar2e 'rom Homi&i e to M r erF an s :se entl%, 'rom M r er:a& to Homi&i e. "etitioner s &laim t8at t8e respon ent J 2e &ommitte 2ravea: se o' is&retion in en%in2 8is Motion to Q as8 t8e Amen e In'ormation 'orM r er on t8e 2ro n o' o :le Jeopar % is not meritorio s.

    "etitioner s Motion to Q as8 9as an&8ore on Se&tion G, R le )) o' t8e R leso' Co rt, 98i&8 provi es3

    SEC. G. ?ro n s. - T8e a&& se ma% move to as8 t8e &omplaint orin'ormation on an% o' t8e 'ollo9in2 2ro n s3

    7 7 7 7

    *i+ T8at t8e a&& se 8as :een previo sl% &onvi&te or a& itte o' t8e o ense&8ar2e , or t8e &ase a2ainst 8im 9as ismisse or ot8er9ise terminate 9it8o t 8ise7press &onsent.

    Se&tion o' t8e same R le la%s o9n t8e re isites in or er t8at t8ee'ense o' o :le Jeopar % ma% prosper, to 9it3

    SEC. . (ormer &onvi&tion or a& ittalF o :le Jeopar %. 8en an a&& se 8as:een &onvi&te or a& itte , or t8e &ase a2ainst 8im ismisse or ot8er9iseterminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent :% a &o rt o' &ompetent J ris i&tion, pon avali &omplaint or in'ormation or ot8er 'ormal &8ar2e s >&ient in 'orm ans :stan&e to s stain a &onvi&tion an a'ter t8e a&& se 8a plea e to t8e &8ar2e,t8e &onvi&tion or a& ittal o' t8e a&& se or t8e ismissal o' t8e &ase s8all :e a :ar

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    18/60

    to anot8er prose& tion 'or t8e o ense &8ar2e , or 'or an% attempt to &ommit t8esame or 'r stration t8ereo', or 'or an% o ense 98i&8 ne&essaril% in&l es or isne&essaril% in&l e in t8e o ense &8ar2e in t8e 'ormer &omplaint or in'ormation.

    T8 s, t8ere is o :le Jeopar % 98en t8e 'ollo9in2 re isites are present3 *)+ a

    =rst Jeopar % atta&8e prior to t8e se&on F *4+ t8e =rst Jeopar % 8as :een vali l%terminate F an *G+ a se&on Jeopar % is 'or t8e same o ense as in t8e =rst.K40

    As to t8e =rst re isite, t8e =rst Jeopar % atta&8es onl% *a+ a'ter a valiin i&tmentF *:+ :e'ore a &ompetent &o rtF *&+ a'ter arrai2nmentF * + 98en a valiplea 8as :een entere F an *e+ 98en t8e a&& se 9as a& itte or &onvi&te , or t8e&ase 9as ismisse or ot8er9ise terminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent.

    It is t8e &onvi&tion or a& ittal o' t8e a&& se or t8e ismissal or terminationo' t8e &ase t8at :ars ' rt8er prose& tion 'or t8e same o ense or an% attempt to&ommit t8e same or t8e 'r stration t8ereo'F or prose& tion 'or an% o ense 98i&8ne&essaril% in&l es or is ne&essaril% in&l e in t8e o ense &8ar2e in t8e 'ormer&omplaint or in'ormation.

    "etitioner s insisten&e t8at t8e respon ent J 2e ismisse or terminate 8is&ase 'or 8omi&i e 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent, 98i&8 is tantamo nt to an a& ittal,is mispla&e .

    Dismissal o' t8e =rst &ase &ontemplate :% Se&tion pres pposes a e=niteor n&on itional ismissal 98i&8 terminates t8e &ase.K4 An 'or t8e ismissal to:e a :ar n er t8e Jeopar % &la se, it m st 8ave t8e e e&t o' a& ittal.

    T8e respon ent J 2e s Or er ate Septem:er )4, 4554 9as 'or t8e trialprose& tor to &orre&t an amen t8e In'ormation : t not to ismiss t8e same pont8e =lin2 o' a ne9 In'ormation &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense as &ontemplate n ert8e last para2rap8 o' Se&tion )0, R le ))5 o' t8e R les o' Co rt -- 98i&8, 'or&onvenien&e, 9e ote a2ain --

    I' it appears at an%time :e'ore J 2ment t8at a mista e 8as :een ma e in &8ar2in2t8e proper o ense, t8e &o rt s8all ismiss t8e ori2inal &omplaint or in'ormation

    pon t8e =lin2 o' a ne9 one &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense in a&&or an&e 9it8 se&tion)1, R le ))1, provi e t8e a&& se s8all not :e pla&e in o :le Jeopar %. T8e &o rtma% re ire t8e 9itnesses to 2ive :ail 'or t8eir appearan&e at t8e trial.

    an Se&tion )1, R le ))1, 98i&8 provi es3

    SEC. )1.- 8en mista e 8as :een ma e in &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense -8en it :e&omes mani'est at an% time :e'ore J 2ment t8at a mista e 8as :een

    ma e in &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense an t8e a&& se &annot :e &onvi&te o' t8eo ense &8ar2e or an% ot8er o ense ne&essaril% in&l e t8erein, t8e a&& se s8all

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    19/60

    not :e is&8ar2e i' t8ere appears 2oo &a se to etain 8im. In s &8 &ase, t8e &o rts8all &ommit t8e a&& se to ans9er 'or t8e proper o ense an ismiss t8e ori2inal&ase pon t8e =lin2 o' t8e proper in'ormation.

    Evi entl%, t8e last para2rap8 o' Se&tion )0, R le ))5, applies onl% 98en t8e

    o ense &8ar2e is 98oll% i erent 'rom t8e o ense prove , i.e., t8e a&& se &annot:e &onvi&te o' a &rime 9it8 98i&8 8e 9as not &8ar2e in t8e in'ormation even i' it:e proven, in 98i&8 &ase, t8ere m st :e a ismissal o' t8e &8ar2e an a s :stit tiono' a ne9 in'ormation &8ar2in2 t8e proper o ense. Se&tion )0 oes not appl% to ase&on in'ormation, 98i&8 involves t8e same o ense or an o ense 98i&8ne&essaril% in&l es or is ne&essaril% in&l e in t8e =rst in'ormation. In t8is&onne&tion, t8e o ense &8ar2e ne&essaril% in&l es t8e o ense prove 98en someo' t8e essential elements or in2re ients o' t8e 'ormer, as alle2e in t8e &omplaint orin'ormation, &onstit te t8e latter. An an o ense &8ar2e is ne&essaril% in&l e int8e o ense prove 98en t8e essential in2re ients o' t8e 'ormer &onstit te or 'orma part o' t8ose &onstit tin2 t8e latter.K46

    Homi&i e is ne&essaril% in&l e in t8e &rime o' m r erF t8 s, t8e respon ent J 2e merel% or ere t8e amen ment o' t8e In'ormation an not t8e ismissal o't8e ori2inal In'ormation. To repeat, it 9as t8e same ori2inal in'ormation t8at 9asamen e :% merel% &rossin2 o t t8e 9or Homi&i e an 9ritin2 t8e 9or

    M r er, instea , 98i&8 s8o9e t8at t8ere 9as no ismissal o' t8e 8omi&i e &ase.

    Anent t8e last iss e, petitioner &onten s t8at respon ent J 2e 2ravel%a: se 8is is&retion in or erin2 t8at t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'or Homi&i e stan sa'ter reali;in2 t8at isre2ar o' ran oes not ali'% t8e illin2 to M r er. T8atr lin2 9as a2ain a violation o' 8is ri28t a2ainst o :le Jeopar %, as 8e 9ill :eprose& te ane9 'or a &8ar2e o' Homi&i e, 98i&8 8as alrea % :een terminateearlier.

    e are not &onvin&e . Respon ent J 2e i not &ommit an% 2rave a: se o'is&retion.

    A rea in2 o' t8e Or er ate De&em:er )6, 4554 s8o9e t8at t8e respon ent J 2e 2rante petitioner s motion 'or re&onsi eration, not on t8e 2ro n t8at o :le Jeopar % e7ists, : t on 8is reali;ation t8at isre2ar o' ran is a 2eneri&a22ravatin2 &ir& mstan&e 98i&8 oes not ali'% t8e illin2 o' t8e vi&tim to m r er.

    T8 s, 8e ri28tl% &orre&te 8imsel' :% reinstatin2 t8e ori2inal In'ormation 'orHomi&i e. T8e re isite o' o :le Jeopar % t8at t8e =rst Jeopar % m st 8aveatta&8e prior to t8e se&on is not present, &onsi erin2 t8at petitioner 9as neit8er&onvi&te nor a& itte F nor 9as t8e &ase a2ainst 8im ismisse or ot8er9iseterminate 9it8o t 8is e7press &onsent.K41

    HERE(ORE, t8e petition is DISMISSED, t8ere :ein2 no 2rave a: se o'is&retion &ommitte :% respon ent ! 2e.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    20/60

    SO ORDERED.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    21/60

    Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManila

    EN BANC

    G.R. No. 10310 M+"*) , 199

    CLAU!IO J. TEE AN4EE, JR., petitioner,vs.

    ON. JO . MA!A'AG +n% PEOPLE OF T E P ILIPPINES, respondents.

    REGALA!O, J.:

    n this special civil action for certiorari , prohibition and mandamus , petitioner principall! see-s@ 3&6 tonullif! the order 1 of respondent 9udge ad itting the a ended infor ation for urder filed in Cri inalCase No.(&0?

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    22/60

    Conse uentl!, private prosecutor Rogelio A. Hinluan filed an o nibus otion 3 for leave of court to filean a ended infor ation and to ad it said a ended infor ation. The a ended infor ation, 2 filed on%ctober &, &((&, reads@

    That on or about the & th da! of $ul!, &((&, in the Municipalit! of Ma-ati,Metro Manila, Philippines and within the 9urisdiction of this :onorable

    Court, the said Claudio Teehankee, Jr. y. Javier , ar ed with a handgun, withintent to -ill and evident pre editation and b! eans of treacher!, did thenand there willfull!, unlawfull! and feloniousl! attac-, assault and shoot withthe said handgun Maureen Navarro :ult an who was hit in the head,there y inflicting mortal wounds which directly caused the death of said!aureen "ultman.

    Petitioner filed an opposition 5 thereto, as well as a re9oinder to the repl! 7 of the prosecution. %nNove ber & , &((&, the trial court issued the uestioned order ad itting the a ended infor ation.

    At the scheduled arraign ent on Nove ber 2

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    23/60

    that the sa e ortal wounds, which were initiall! frustrated 3 sic 6 b! ti el! and able edicalassistance, ulti atel! caused the death of the victi , because it could have been caused b! asupervening act or fact which is not i putable to the offender. 9 "ro this, he argues that there beinga substantial a end ent, the sa e a! no longer be allowed after arraign ent and during the trial.

    Corollar! thereto, petitioner then postulates that since the a ended infor ation for urder charges

    an entirel! different offense, involving as it does a new fact, that is, the fact of death whose causehas to be established, it is essential that another preli inar! investigation on the new charge beconducted before the new infor ation can be ad itted.

    8e find no erit in the petition. There are sufficient legal and 9urisprudential oorings for the ordersof the trial court.

    #ection &?, Rule &&; of the &('1 Rules on Cri inal Procedure provides@

    #ec. &?. #mendment . I The infor ation or co plaint a! be a ended, insubstance or for , without leave of court, at an! ti e before the accusedpleadsG and thereafter and during the trial as to all atters of for , b! leave

    and at the discretion of the court, when the sa e can be done withoutpre9udice to the rights of the accused.

    f it appears at an! ti e before 9udg ent that a ista-e has been ade incharging the proper offense, the court shall dis iss the original co plaint orinfor ation upon the filing of a new one charging the proper offense inaccordance with Rule &&(, #ection &&, provided the accused would not beplaced thereb! in double 9eopard! and a! also re uire the witnesses to givebail for their appearance at the trial.

    The first paragraph provides the rules for amendment of the infor ation or co plaint, while thesecond paragraph refers to the su stitution of the infor ation or co plaint.

    t a! accordingl! be posited that both a end ent and substitution of the infor ation a! be adebefore or after the defendant pleaded, but the! differ in the following respects@

    &. A end ent a! involve either for al or substantial changes, while substitution necessaril!involves a substantial change fro the original chargeG

    2. A end ent before plea has been entered can be effected without leave of court, but substitutionof infor ation ust be with leave of court as the original infor ation has to be dis issedG

    . 8here the a end ent is onl! as to for , there is no need for another preli inar! investigationand the reta-ing of the plea of the accusedG in substitution of infor ation, another preli inar!investigation is entailed and the accused has to plead anew to the new infor ationG and

    ?. An a ended infor ation refers to the sa e offense charged in the original infor ation or to anoffense which necessaril! includes or is necessaril! included in the original charge, hencesubstantial a end ents to the infor ation after the plea has been ta-en cannot be ade over theob9ection of the accused, for if the original infor ation would be withdrawn, the accused could invo-edouble 9eopard!. %n the other hand, substitution re uires or presupposes that the new infor ationinvolves a different offense which does not include or is not necessaril! included in the originalcharge, hence the accused cannot clai double 9eopard!.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    24/60

    n deter ining, therefore, whether there should be an a end ent under the first paragraph of#ection &?, Rule &&;, or a substitution of infor ation under the second paragraph thereof, the rule isthat where the second infor ation involves the sa e offense, or an offense which necessaril!includes or is necessaril! included in the first infor ation, and a end ent of the infor ation issufficientG otherwise, where the new infor ation charges an offense which is distinct and differentfro that initiall! charged, a substitution is in order.

    There is identit! between the two offenses when the evidence to support a conviction for one offensewould be sufficient to warrant a conviction for the other, or when the second offense is e actl! thesa e as the first, or when the second offense is an atte pt to co it or a frustration of, or when itnecessaril! includes or is necessaril! included in, the offense charged in the first infor ation. n thisconnection, an offense a! be said to necessaril! include another when so e of the essentialele ents or ingredients of the for er, as this is alleged in the infor ation, constitute the latter. And,vice0versa, an offense a! be said to be necessaril! included in another when the essentialingredients of the for er constitute or for a part of those constituting the latter. 10

    +oing now to the case at bar, it is evident that frustrated urder is but a stage in the e ecution of thecri e of urder, hence the for er is necessaril! included in the latter. t is indispensable that the

    essential ele ent of intent to -ill, as well as ualif!ing circu stances such as treacher! or evidentpre editation, be alleged in both an infor ation for frustrated urder and for urder, thereb!eaning and proving that the sa e aterial allegations are essential to the sufficienc! of the

    infor ations filed for both. This is because, e cept for the death of the victi , the essential ele entsof consu ated urder li-ewise constitute the essential ingredients to convict herein petitioner forthe offense of frustrated urder.

    n the present case, therefore, there is an identit! of offenses charged in both the original and thea ended infor ation. 8hat is involved here is not a variance in the nature of different offensescharged, but onl! a change in the stage of e ecution of the sa e offense fro frustrated toconsu ated urder. This is being the case, we hold that an a end ent of the original infor ationwill suffice and, conse uent thereto, the filing of the a ended infor ation for urder is proper.

    Petitioner would insist, however, that the additional allegation on the fact of death of the victiMaureen Navarro :ult an constitutes a substantial a end ent which a! no longer be allowedafter a plea has been entered. The proposition is erroneous and untenable.

    As earlier indicated, #ection &? of Rule &&; provides that an a end ent, either of for orsubstance, a! be ade at an! ti e before the accused enters a plea to the charge and, thereafter,as to all atters of for with leave of court.

    A substantial a end ent consists of the recital of facts constituting the offense charged anddeter inative of the 9urisdiction of the court. All other atters are erel! of for . 11 Thus, the followinghave been held to be erel! for al a end ents, vi$ @ 3&6 new allegations which relate onl! to the rangeof the penalt! that the court ight i pose in the event of convictionG 1 326 an a end ent which does not

    charge another offense different or distinct fro that charged in the original oneG13

    3 6 additionalallegations which do not alter the prosecution7s theor! of the case so as to cause surprise to the accusedand affect the for of defense he has or will assu eG and 3?6 an a end ent which does not adversel!affect an! substantial right of the accused, such as his right to invo-e prescription. 12

    8e repeat that after arraign ent and during the trial, a end ents are allowed, but onl! as toatters of for and provided that no pre9udice is caused to the rights of the accused. 15 The test of

    whether an a end ent is onl! of for and an accused is not pre9udiced b! such a end ent has beensaid to be whether or not a defense under the infor ation as it originall! stood would be e uall! available

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    25/60

    after the a end ent is ade, and whether or not an! evidence the accused ight have would be e uall!applicable to the infor ation in the one for as in the otherG if the answer is in the affir ative, thea end ent is one of for and not of substance. 1

    Now, an ob9ective appraisal of the a ended infor ation for urder filed against herein petitioner willreadil! show that the nature of the offense originall! charged was not actuall! changed. nstead, an

    additional allegation, that is, the supervening fact of the death of the victi was erel! supplied toaid the trial court in deter ining the proper penalt! for the cri e. That the accused co itted afelonious act with intent to -ill the victi continues to be the prosecution7s theor!. There is no

    uestion that whatever defense herein petitioner a! adduce under the original infor ation forfrustrated urder e uall! applies to the a ended infor ation for urder. >nder the circu stancesthus obtaining, it is irre issible that the a ended infor ation for urder is, at ost, an a end entas to for which is allowed even during the trial of the case.

    t conse uentl! follows that since onl! a for al a end ent was involved and introduced in thesecond infor ation, a preli inar! investigation is unnecessar! and cannot be de anded b! theaccused. The filing of the a ended infor ation without the re uisite preli inar! investigation doesnot violate petitioner7s right to be secured against hast!, alicious and oppressive prosecutions, andto be protected fro an open and public accusation of a cri e, as well as fro the trouble, e pensesand an iet! of a public trial. The a ended infor ation could not conceivabl! have co e as asurprise to petitioner for the si ple and obvious reason that it charges essentiall! the sa e offenseas that charged under the original infor ation. "urther ore, as we have heretofore held, if the cri eoriginall! charged is related to the a ended charge such that an in uir! into one would elicitsubstantiall! the sa e facts that an in uir! into the other would reveal, a new preli inar!investigation is not necessar!. 17

    8e find nothing irregular in the appoint ent b! the trial court of a counsel de oficio for hereinpetitioner whose counsel of record refused to participate in the proceedings because of an allegedlegal issue. #uch issue having been de onstrated herein as baseless, we apprehend his refusal toparticipate in the trial as causative of or contributive to the dela! in the disposition of the case. And,finall!, for as long as the substantial rights of herein petitioner and other persons charged in court

    are not pre9udiced, the scheduling of cases should be left to the sound discretion of the trial court.

    8:ERE"%RE, it being clearl! apparent that respondent 9udge did not co it the errors speciousl!attributed to hi , the e traordinar! writs pra!ed for are hereb! =EN E= and the instant petition is= #M ##E= for lac- of erit.

    #% %R=ERE=.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    26/60

    (IRST DIVISION

    K?.R. No. )0 5G. April )0, 4550

    "HILI""INE RABBIT BUS LINES, INC., petitioner, vs. "EO"LE O( THE "HILI""INES,respon ent.

    D E C I S I O N

    "AN?ANIBAN, !.3

    8en t8e a&& se -emplo%ee a:s&on s or J mps :ail, t8e J 2ment mete o t:e&omes =nal an e7e& tor%. T8e emplo%er &annot e'eat t8e =nalit% o' t8e

    J 2ment :% =lin2 a noti&e o' appeal on its o9n :e8al' in t8e 2 ise o' as in2 'or arevie9 o' its s :si iar% &ivil lia:ilit%. Bot8 t8e primar% &ivil lia:ilit% o' t8e a&& se -emplo%ee an t8e s :si iar% &ivil lia:ilit% o' t8e emplo%er are &arrie in one sin2le

    e&ision t8at 8as :e&ome =nal an e7e& tor%.

    T8e Case

    Be'ore t8is Co rt is a "etition 'or Revie9K) n er R le 0/ o' t8e R les o' Co rt,assailin2 t8e Mar&8 41, 4555K4 an t8e Mar&8 4 , 455)KG Resol tions o' t8e Co rto' Appeals *CA+ in CA-?R CV No. /1G15. "etitioner s appeal 'rom t8e J 2ment o't8e Re2ional Trial Co rt *RTC+ o' San (ernan o, La Union in Criminal Case No. 4/G/9as ismisse in t8e =rst Resol tion as 'ollo9s3

    HERE(ORE, 'or all t8e 'ore2oin2, t8e motion to ismiss is ?RANTED an t8eappeal is or ere DISMISSED. K0

    T8e se&on Resol tion enie petitioner s Motion 'or Re&onsi eration.K/

    T8e (a&ts

    T8e 'a&ts o' t8e &ase are s mmari;e :% t8e CA in t8is 9ise3

    On ! l% 4 , )110, a&& se KNapoleon Roman % Ma&a an2 an2 9as 'o n 2 ilt%an &onvi&te o' t8e &rime o' re& less impr en&e res ltin2 to triple 8omi&i e,m ltiple p8%si&al inJ ries an ama2e to propert% an 9as senten&e to s er t8epenalt% o' 'o r *0+ %ears, nine *1+ mont8s an eleven *))+ a%s to si7 *

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    27/60

    t8ree %ears at "0/,555.55 per ann m, an t8e ' rt8er s m o' "),555,555.55 asmoral ama2es an "455,555.55 as attorne% s 'eesKF

    &. to t8e 8eirs o' LORNA ANCHETA, t8e s m o' "/5,555.55 as in emnit% 'or 8ereat8, t8e s m o' "44,6G6.55 as ' neral e7penses, t8e s m o' "45,/00.10 as

    me i&al e7penses an 8er loss o' in&ome 'or G5 %ears at "),555.55 per mont8, ant8e ' rt8er s m o' ")55,555.55 'or moral ama2esF

    . to MAUREEN BRENNAN, t8e s m o' "441,

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    28/60

    o' appeal 98en appellant J mps :ail. Co nsel 'or a&& se , also a mitte l% 8irean provi e :% Kpetitioner , =le a noti&e o' appeal 98i&8 9as enie :% t8e trial&o rt. e a>rme t8e enial o' t8e noti&e o' appeal =le in :e8al' o' a&& se .

    Sim ltaneo sl%, on A 2 st

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    29/60

    "ropriet% o' Appeal :% t8e Emplo%er

    "ointin2 o t t8at it 8a seasona:l% =le a noti&e o' appeal 'rom t8e RTC De&ision,petitioner &onten s t8at t8e J 2ment o' &onvi&tion a2ainst t8e a&& se -emplo%ee8as not attaine =nalit%. T8e 'ormer insists t8at its appeal sta%e t8e =nalit%,

    not9it8stan in2 t8e 'a&t t8at t8e latter 8a J mpe :ail. In e e&t, petitioner ar2 est8at its appeal ta es t8e pla&e o' t8at o' t8e a&& se -emplo%ee.

    e are not pers a e .

    Appeals in Criminal Cases

    Se&tion ) o' R le )44 o' t8e 4555 Revise R les o' Criminal "ro&e re states t8 s3

    An% part% ma% appeal 'rom a J 2ment or =nal or er, nless t8e a&& se 9ill :e

    pla&e in o :le Jeopar %.Clearl%, :ot8 t8e a&& se an t8e prose& tion ma% appeal a &riminal &ase, : t t8e2overnment ma% o so onl% i' t8e a&& se 9o l not t8ere:% :e pla&e in o :le

    Jeopar %.K1 ( rt8ermore, t8e prose& tion &annot appeal on t8e 2ro n t8at t8ea&& se s8o l 8ave :een 2iven a more severe penalt%.K)5 On t8e ot8er 8an , t8eo en e parties ma% also appeal t8e J 2ment 9it8 respe&t to t8eir ri28t to &ivillia:ilit%. I' t8e a&& se 8as t8e ri28t to appeal t8e J 2ment o' &onvi&tion, t8eo en e parties s8o l 8ave t8e same ri28t to appeal as m &8 o' t8e J 2ment asis preJ i&ial to t8em.K))

    Appeal :% t8e A&& se 8o ! mps Bailell-esta:lis8e in o r J ris i&tion is t8e prin&iple t8at t8e appellate &o rt ma%,pon motion or mot proprio, ismiss an appeal rin2 its pen en&% i' t8e a&& se

    J mps :ail. T8e se&on para2rap8 o' Se&tion 6 o' R le )40 o' t8e 4555 ReviseR les o' Criminal "ro&e re provi es3

    T8e Co rt o' Appeals ma% also, pon motion o' t8e appellee or mot proprio,ismiss t8e appeal i' t8e appellant es&apes 'rom prison or &on=nement, J mps :ail

    or Pees to a 'orei2n &o ntr% rin2 t8e pen en&% o' t8e appeal. K)4

    T8is r le is :ase on t8e rationale t8at appellants lose t8eir stan in2 in &o rt 98ent8e% a:s&on . Unless t8e% s rren er or s :mit to t8e &o rt s J ris i&tion, t8e% are

    eeme to 8ave 9aive t8eir ri28t to see J i&ial relie'.

    Moreover, t8is o&trine applies not onl% to t8e a&& se 98o J mps :ail rin2 t8eappeal, : t also to one 98o oes so rin2 t8e trial. ! sti&e (loren; D. Re2ala os &&in&tl% e7plains t8e prin&iple in t8is 9ise3

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    30/60

    7 7 7. 8en, as in t8is &ase, t8e a&& se es&ape a'ter 8is arrai2nment an rin2t8e trial, : t t8e trial in a:sentia pro&ee e res ltin2 in t8e prom l2ation o' a

    J 2ment a2ainst 8im an 8is &o nsel appeale , sin&e 8e nonet8eless remaine atlar2e 8is appeal m st :e ismisse :% analo2% 9it8 t8e a'oresai provision o' t8isR le KR le )40, 6 o' t8e R les on Criminal "ro&e re . 7 7 7 K)0

    T8e a&& se &annot :e a&&or e t8e ri28t to appeal nless t8e% vol ntaril% s :mitto t8e J ris i&tion o' t8e &o rt or are ot8er9ise arreste 9it8in )/ a%s 'rom noti&eo' t8e J 2ment a2ainst t8em.K)/ 8ile at lar2e, t8e% &annot see relie' 'rom t8e&o rt, as t8e% are eeme to 8ave 9aive t8e appeal.K)rm or mo i'% t8e J 2mento' t8e lo9er &o rt an to in&rease or re &e t8e penalt% it impose .KG0

    I' t8e present appeal is 2iven &o rse, t8e 98ole &ase a2ainst t8e a&& se -emplo%ee:e&omes open to revie9. It t8 s 'ollo9s t8at a penalt% 8i28er t8an t8at 98i&8 8asalrea % :een impose :% t8e trial &o rt ma% :e mete o t to 8im. "etitioner sappeal 9o l t8 s violate 8is ri28t a2ainst o :le Jeopar %, sin&e t8e J 2menta2ainst 8im &o l :e&ome s :Je&t to mo i=&ation 9it8o t 8is &onsent.

    e are not in a position to se&on -2 ess t8e reason 98% t8e a&& se e e&tivel%9aive 8is ri28t to appeal :% J mpin2 :ail. It is &lear, t8o 28, t8at petitioner ma%

    not appeal 9it8o t violatin2 8is ri28t a2ainst o :le Jeopar %.

    E e&t o' A:s&on in2 on t8e Appeal "ro&ess

    Moreover, 9it8in t8e meanin2 o' t8e prin&iples 2overnin2 t8e prevailin2 &riminalpro&e re, t8e a&& se implie l% 9it8 re9 8is appeal :% J mpin2 :ail an t8ere:%ma e t8e J 2ment o' t8e &o rt :elo9 =nal.KG/ Havin2 :een a ' 2itive 'rom J sti&e'or a lon2 perio o' time, 8e is eeme to 8ave 9aive 8is ri28t to appeal. T8 s, 8is&onvi&tion is no9 =nal an e7e& tor%. T8e Co rt in "eople v. An2 ?io&KG< r le 3

    T8ere are &ertain ' n amental ri28ts 98i&8 &annot :e 9aive even :% t8e a&& se8imsel', : t t8e ri28t o' appeal is not one o' t8em. T8is ri28t is 2rante solel% 'ort8e :ene=t o' t8e a&& se . He ma% avail o' it or not, as 8e pleases. He ma% 9aiveit eit8er e7pressl% or :% impli&ation. 8en t8e a&& se Pees a'ter t8e &ase 8as:een s :mitte to t8e &o rt 'or e&ision, 8e 9ill :e eeme to 8ave 9aive 8is ri28tto appeal 'rom t8e J 2ment ren ere a2ainst 8im. 7 7 7. KG

    B% Peein2, t8e 8erein a&& se e78i:ite &ontempt o' t8e a t8orit% o' t8e &o rt anpla&e 8imsel' in a position to spe& late on 8is &8an&es 'or a reversal. In t8epro&ess, 8e ept 8imsel' o t o' t8e rea&8 o' J sti&e, : t 8ope to ren er t8e

    J 2ment n 2ator% at 8is option.KG6 S &8 &on &t is intolera:le an oes notinvite lenien&% on t8e part o' t8e appellate &o rt.KG1

    Conse entl%, t8e J 2ment a2ainst an appellant 98o es&apes an 98o re' ses tos rren er to t8e proper a t8orities :e&omes =nal an e7e& tor%.K05

    T8 s 'ar, 9e 8ave &lari=e t8at petitioner 8as no ri28t to appeal t8e &riminal &asea2ainst t8e a&& se -emplo%eeF t8at :% J mpin2 :ail, 8e 8as 9aive 8is ri28t toappealF an t8at t8e J 2ment in t8e &riminal &ase a2ainst 8im is no9 =nal.

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    34/60

    S :si iar% Lia:ilit% Upon (inalit% o' ! 2ment

    As a matter o' la9, t8e s :si iar% lia:ilit% o' petitioner no9 a&&r es. "etitionerar2 es t8at t8e r lin2s o' t8is Co rt in Miran a v. Malate ?ara2e W Ta7i&a:, In&.,K0)Alvare; v. CAK04 an # sa% v. A ilK0G o not appl% to t8e present &ase, :e&a se it

    8as 'ollo9e t8e Co rt s ire&tive to t8e emplo%ers in t8ese &ases to ta e part in t8e&riminal &ases a2ainst t8eir emplo%ees. B% parti&ipatin2 in t8e e'ense o' itsemplo%ee, 8erein petitioner tries to s8iel itsel' 'rom t8e n isp te r lin2s lai

    o9n in t8ese lea in2 &ases.

    S &8 post rin2 is ntena:le. In isse&tin2 t8ese &ases on s :si iar% lia:ilit%,petitioner lost tra& o' t8e most :asi& tenet t8e% 8ave lai o9n -- t8at anemplo%er s lia:ilit% in a =n in2 o' 2 ilt a2ainst its a&& se -emplo%ee is s :si iar%.

    Un er Arti&le )5G o' t8e Revise "enal Co e, emplo%ers are s :si iaril% lia:le 'ort8e a J i&ate &ivil lia:ilities o' t8eir emplo%ees in t8e event o' t8e latter sinsolven&%.K00 T8e provisions o' t8e Revise "enal Co e on s :si iar% lia:ilit% --Arti&les )54 an )5G -- are eeme 9ritten into t8e J 2ments in t8e &ases to 98i&8t8e% are appli&a:le.K0/ T8 s, in t8e ispositive portion o' its e&ision, t8e trial &o rtnee not e7pressl% prono n&e t8e s :si iar% lia:ilit% o' t8e emplo%er.

    In t8e a:sen&e o' an% &oll sion :et9een t8e a&& se -emplo%ee an t8e o en epart%, t8e J 2ment o' &onvi&tion s8o l :in t8e person 98o is s :si iaril% lia:le.K0< In e e&t an impli&ation, t8e sti2ma o' a &riminal &onvi&tion s rpasses mere&ivil lia:ilit%.K0

    To allo9 emplo%ers to isp te t8e &ivil lia:ilit% =7e in a &riminal &ase 9o l ena:let8em to amen , n lli'% or e'eat a =nal J 2ment ren ere :% a &ompetent &o rt.K06 B% t8e same to en, to allo9 t8em to appeal t8e =nal &riminal &onvi&tion o' t8eiremplo%ees 9it8o t t8e latter s &onsent 9o l also res lt in improperl% amen in2,n lli'%in2 or e'eatin2 t8e J 2ment.

    T8e e&ision &onvi&tin2 an emplo%ee in a &riminal &ase is :in in2 an &on&l sivepon t8e emplo%er not onl% 9it8 re2ar to t8e 'ormer s &ivil lia:ilit%, : t also 9it8

    re2ar to its amo nt. T8e lia:ilit% o' an emplo%er &annot :e separate 'rom t8at o't8e emplo%ee.K01

    Be'ore t8e emplo%ers s :si iar% lia:ilit% is e7a&te , 8o9ever, t8ere m st :ea e ate evi en&e esta:lis8in2 t8at *)+ t8e% are in ee t8e emplo%ers o' t8e&onvi&te emplo%eesF *4+ t8at t8e 'ormer are en2a2e in some in o' in str%F *G+t8at t8e &rime 9as &ommitte :% t8e emplo%ees in t8e is&8ar2e o' t8eir tiesFan *0+ t8at t8e e7e& tion a2ainst t8e latter 8as not :een satis=e e toinsolven&%.K/5

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    35/60

    T8e resol tion o' t8ese iss es nee not :e one in a separate &ivil a&tion. B t t8eetermination m st :e :ase on t8e evi en&e t8at t8e o en e part% an t8e

    emplo%er ma% ' ll% an 'reel% present. S &8 etermination ma% :e one in t8esame &riminal a&tion in 98i&8 t8e emplo%ee s lia:ilit%, &riminal an &ivil, 8as :eenprono n&e FK/) an in a 8earin2 set 'or t8at pre&ise p rpose, 9it8 e noti&e to

    t8e emplo%er, as part o' t8e pro&ee in2s 'or t8e e7e& tion o' t8e J 2ment.

    ! st :e&a se t8e present petitioner parti&ipate in t8e e'ense o' its a&& se -emplo%ee oes not mean t8at its lia:ilit% 8as trans'orme its nat reF its lia:ilit%remains s :si iar%. Neit8er 9ill its parti&ipation erase its s :si iar% lia:ilit%. T8e'a&t remains t8at sin&e t8e a&& se -emplo%ee s &onvi&tion 8as attaine =nalit%,t8en t8e s :si iar% lia:ilit% o' t8e emplo%er ipso 'a&to atta&8es.

    A&&or in2 to t8e ar2 ment o' petitioner, 'airness i&tates t8at 98ile t8e =nalit% o'&onvi&tion &o l :e t8e proper san&tion to :e impose pon t8e a&& se 'or

    J mpin2 :ail, t8e same san&tion s8o l not a e&t it. In e e&t, petitioner-emplo%er

    splits t8is &ase into t9o3 =rst, 'or itsel'F an se&on , 'or its a&& se -emplo%ee.

    T8e ntena:ilit% o' t8is ar2 ment is &learl% evi ent. T8ere is onl% one &riminal &asea2ainst t8e a&& se -emplo%ee. A =n in2 o' 2 ilt 8as :ot8 &riminal an &ivilaspe&ts. It is t8e 8ei28t o' a:s r it% 'or t8is sin2le &ase to :e =nal as to t8ea&& se 98o J mpe :ail, : t not as to an entit% 98ose lia:ilit% is epen ent pont8e &onvi&tion o' t8e 'ormer.

    T8e s :si iar% lia:ilit% o' petitioner is in&i ental to an epen ent on t8e pe& niar%&ivil lia:ilit% o' t8e a&& se -emplo%ee. Sin&e t8e &ivil lia:ilit% o' t8e latter 8as:e&ome =nal an en'or&ea:le :% reason o' 8is Pi28t, t8en t8e 'ormer s s :si iar%

    &ivil lia:ilit% 8as also :e&ome imme iatel% en'or&ea:le. Respon ent is &orre&t inar2 in2 t8at t8e &on&ept o' s :si iar% lia:ilit% is 8i28l% &ontin2ent on t8e impositiono' t8e primar% &ivil lia:ilit%.

    No Deprivation o' D e "ro&ess

    As to t8e ar2 ment t8at petitioner 9as eprive o' e pro&ess, 9e reiterate t8at98at is so 28t to :e en'or&e is t8e s :si iar% &ivil lia:ilit% in&i ent to an

    epen ent pon t8e emplo%ee s &riminal ne2li2en&e. In ot8er 9or s, t8e emplo%er:e&omes ipso 'a&to s :si iaril% lia:le pon t8e &onvi&tion o' t8e emplo%ee an ponproo' o' t8e latter s insolven&%, in t8e same 9a% t8at a& ittal 9ipes o t not onl%

    8is primar% &ivil lia:ilit%, : t also 8is emplo%er s s :si iar% lia:ilit% 'or 8is &riminalne2li2en&e.K/4

    It s8o l :e stresse t8at t8e ri28t to appeal is neit8er a nat ral ri28t nor a part o'e pro&ess.K/G It is merel% a pro&e ral reme % o' stat tor% ori2in, a reme % t8at

    ma% :e e7er&ise onl% in t8e manner pres&ri:e :% t8e provisions o' la9 a t8ori;in2s &8 e7er&ise.K/0 Hen&e, t8e le2al re irements m st :e stri&tl% &omplie 9it8.K//

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    36/60

    It 9o l :e in&orre&t to &onsi er t8e re irements o' t8e r les on appeal as merel%8armless an trivial te&8ni&alities t8at &an :e is&ar e .K/< In ee , eviations'rom t8e r les &annot :e tolerate .K/ In t8ese times 98en &o rt o& ets are&lo22e 9it8 n mero s liti2ations, s &8 r les 8ave to :e 'ollo9e :% parties 9it82reater = elit%, so as to 'a&ilitate t8e or erl% isposition o' t8ose &ases.K/6

    A'ter a J 2ment 8as :e&ome =nal, veste ri28ts are a& ire :% t8e 9innin2 part%.I' t8e proper losin2 part% 8as t8e ri28t to =le an appeal 9it8in t8e pres&ri:e perio ,t8en t8e 'ormer 8as t8e &orrelative ri28t to enJo% t8e =nalit% o' t8e resol tion o' t8e&ase.K/1

    In 'a&t, petitioner a mits t8at :% 8elpin2 t8e a&& se -emplo%ee, it parti&ipate int8e pro&ee in2s :e'ore t8e RTCF t8 s, it &annot :e sai t8at t8e emplo%er 9as

    eprive o' e pro&ess. It mi28t 8ave lost its ri28t to appeal, : t it 9as not enieits a% in &o rt.K&ientl% proven t8at t8ere e7ists anemplo%er-emplo%ee relations8ipF t8at t8e emplo%er is en2a2e in some in o'in str%F an t8at t8e emplo%ee 8as :een a J 2e 2 ilt% o' t8e 9ron2' l a&t an'o n to 8ave &ommitte t8e o ense in t8e is&8ar2e o' 8is ties. T8e proo' is&lear 'rom t8e a missions o' petitioner t8at Ko n 4< A 2 st )115, 98ile on itsre2 lar trip 'rom Laoa2 to Manila, a passen2er : s o9ne :% petitioner, :ein2 t8enoperate :% petitioner s river, Napoleon Roman, =2 re in an a&&i ent in San ! an,La Union 7 7 7. K

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    37/60

    Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

    Manila

    " R#T = H # %N

    G.R. No. 175 21 Fe "u+"/ 2, 010

    INTEGRATE! AR OF T E P ILIPPINES "e "e#en(e% / $(# N+($on+ P"e#$%en(, Jo#e An#e oI. C+%$6, . ARR' L. RO UE, +n% JOEL RUI UTU'AN, Petitioners,vs.

    ONORA LE MANILA MA'OR JOSE LITO ATIEN A, Respondent.

    = E C # % N

    CARPIO MORALES, J.:

    Petitioners ntegrated Bar of the Philippines & 3 BP6 and law!ers :. :arr! . Ro ue and $oel R.Butu!an appeal the $une 2', 2;;< =ecision 2 and the %ctober 2

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    38/60

    The MP= thereupon instituted on $une 2

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    39/60

    pendenc! of a pre9udicial uestion should be ade at the first instance in the cri inal action, and notbefore this Court in an appeal fro the civil action.

    n proceeding to resolve the petition on the erits, the appellate court found no grave abuse ofdiscretion on the part of respondent because the Public Asse bl! Act does not categoricall! re uire

    respondent to specif! in writing the i inent and grave danger of a substantive evil which warrantsthe denial or odification of the per it and erel! andates that the action ta-en shall be in writingand shall be served on respondent within 2? hours. The appellate court went on to hold thatrespondent is authori5ed to regulate the e ercise of the freedo of e pression and of publicasse bl! which are not absolute, and that the challenged per it is consistent with Pla5a MirandaJsdesignation as a freedo par- where protest rallies are allowed without per it.

    The Court finds for petitioners.

    #ection < of the Public Asse bl! Act reads@

    #ection

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    40/60

    3g6 All cases filed in court under this #ection shall be decided within twent!0four 32?6 hoursfro date of filing. Cases filed hereunder shall be i ediatel! endorsed to the e ecutive

    9udge for disposition or, in his absence, to the ne t in ran-.

    3h6 n all cases, an! decision a! be appealed to the #upre e Court.

    3i6 Telegraphic appeals to be followed b! for al appeals are hereb! allowed. 3underscoringsupplied6

    nBayan, %arapatan, %ilusang !ag u ukid ng &ilipinas '%!&( v. Ermita ,& the Court reiterated@

    "reedo of asse bl! connotes the right of the people to eet peaceabl! for consultation anddiscussion of atters of public concern. t is entitled to be accorded the ut ost deference andrespect. I( $# no( (o e $ $(e%, u*) e## %en$e%, e:*e ( on + #)o;$n&, +# $# ()e *+#e ;$()

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    41/60

    Respondent failed to indicate how he had arrived at odif!ing the ter s of the per it against thestandard of a clear and present danger test which, it bears repeating, is an indispensable conditionto such odification. Nothing in the issued per it adverts to an i inent and grave danger of asubstantive evil, which blan- denial or odification would, when granted i pri atur as theappellate court would have it, render illusor! an! 9udicial scrutin! thereof.

    t is true that the licensing official, here respondent Ma!or, is not devoid of discretion in deter iningwhether or not a per it would be granted. t is not, however, unfettered discretion. 8hile prudencere uires that there be a realistic appraisal not of what a! possibl! occur but of what

    a! pro a ly occur, given all the relevant circu stances, still the assu ption especiall! so wherethe asse bl! is scheduled for a specific public place is that the per it ust be for the asse bl!being held there. T)e e:e"*$#e o< #u*) + "$&)(, $n ()e +n&u+&e o< Ju#($*e Ro e"(#, # e+?$n&

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    42/60

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    43/60

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    44/60

    T8e Iss e

    T8e onl% iss e in t8is &ase is 98et8er t8e resol tion o' t8e a&tion 'orann lment o' marria2e is a preJ i&ial estion t8at 9arrants t8e s spension o' t8e&riminal &ase 'or 'r strate parri&i e a2ainst petitioner.

    T8e R lin2 o' t8is Co rt

    T8e petition 8as no merit.

    Civil Case M st :e Instit te Be'ore t8e Criminal Case

    Se&tion , R le ))) o' t8e 4555 R les on Criminal "ro&e reK< provi es3

    Se&tion . Elements o' "reJ i&ial Q estion. - T8e elements o' a preJ i&ialestion are3 *a+ t8e previo sl% instit te &ivil a&tion involves an iss e similar or

    intimatel% relate to t8e iss e raise in t8e s :se ent &riminal a&tion an *:+ t8e

    resol tion o' s &8 iss e etermines 98et8er or not t8e &riminal a&tion ma% pro&ee . T8e r le is &lear t8at t8e &ivil a&tion m st :e instit te =rst :e'ore t8e =lin2 o' t8e &riminal a&tion. In t8is &ase, t8e In'ormationK 'or (r strate "arri&i e 9as

    ate G5 A 2 st 4550. It 9as ra e to RTC Q e;on Cit% on 4/ O&to:er 4550 as pert8e stampe ate o' re&eipt on t8e In'ormation. T8e RTC Q e;on Cit% set CriminalCase No. Q-50-)G50)/ 'or pre-trial an trial on )0 (e:r ar% 455/. "etitioner 9asserve s mmons in Civil Case No. 50- G14 on (e:r ar% 455/.K6 Respon ent spetitionK1 in Civil Case No. 50- G14 9as ate 0 Novem:er 4550 an 9as =le on /Novem:er 4550. Clearl%, t8e &ivil &ase 'or ann lment 9as =le a'ter t8e =lin2 o' t8e&riminal &ase 'or 'r strate parri&i e. As s &8, t8e re irement o' Se&tion , R le

    ))) o' t8e 4555 R les on Criminal "ro&e re 9as not met sin&e t8e &ivil a&tion 9as=le s :se ent to t8e =lin2 o' t8e &riminal a&tion.

    Ann lment o' Marria2e is not a "reJ i&ial Q estion in Criminal Case 'or "arri&i e

    ( rt8er, t8e resol tion o' t8e &ivil a&tion is not a preJ i&ial estion t8at9o l 9arrant t8e s spension o' t8e &riminal a&tion.

    T8ere is a preJ i&ial estion 98en a &ivil a&tion an a &riminal a&tion are:ot8 pen in2, an t8ere e7ists in t8e &ivil a&tion an iss e 98i&8 m st :epreemptivel% resolve :e'ore t8e &riminal a&tion ma% pro&ee :e&a se 8o9soevert8e iss e raise in t8e &ivil a&tion is resolve 9o l :e eterminative o' t8e 2 ilt orinno&en&e o' t8e a&& se in t8e &riminal &ase.K)5 A preJ i&ial estion is e=neas3

    7 7 7 one t8at arises in a &ase t8e resol tion o' 98i&8 is a lo2i&al ante&e ent o't8e iss e involve t8erein, an t8e &o2ni;an&e o' 98i&8 pertains to anot8er tri: nal.It is a estion :ase on a 'a&t istin&t an separate 'rom t8e &rime : t sointimatel% &onne&te 9it8 it t8at it etermines t8e 2 ilt or inno&en&e o' t8e

  • 8/9/2019 crim pro 01-23-15

    45/60

    a&& se , an 'or it to s spen t8e &riminal a&tion, it m st appear not onl% t8at sai&ase involves 'a&ts intimatel% relate to t8ose pon 98i&8 t8e &riminal prose& tion9o l :e :ase : t also t8at in t8e resol tion o' t8e iss e or iss es raise in t8e&ivil &ase, t8e 2 ilt or inno&en&e o' t8e a&& se 9o l ne&essaril% :e etermine .K))

    T8e relations8ip :et9een t8e o en er an t8e vi&tim is a e% element int8e &rime o' parri&i e,K)4 98i&8 p nis8es an% person 98o s8all ill 8is 'at8er,mot8er, or &8il , 98et8er le2itimate or ille2itimate, or an% o' 8is as&en ants or

    es&en ants, or 8is spo se. K)G T8e relations8ip :et9een t8e o en er an t8evi&tim istin2 is8es t8e &rime o' parri&i e 'rom m r erK)0 or 8omi&i e.K)/Ho9ever, t8e iss e in t8e ann lment o' marria2e is not similar or intimatel% relateto t8e iss e in t8e &riminal &ase 'or parri&i e. ( rt8er, t8e relations8ip :et9een t8eo en er an t8e vi&tim is not eterminative o' t8e 2 ilt or inno&en&e o' t8ea&& se .

    T8e iss e in t8e &ivil &ase 'or ann lment o' marria2e n er Arti&le G< o' t8e(amil% Co e is 98et8er petitioner is ps%&8olo2i&all% in&apa&itate to &ompl% 9it8t8e essential marital o:li2ations. T8e iss e in parri&i e is 98et8er t8e a&& se

    ille t8e vi&tim. In t8is &ase, sin&e petitioner 9as &8ar2e 9it8 'r strate parri&i e,t8e iss e is 98et8er 8e per'orme all t8e a&ts o' e7e& tion 98i&8 9o l 8ave illerespon ent as a &onse en&e : t 98i&8, nevert8eless, i not pro &e it :% reasono' &a ses in epen ent o' petitioner s 9ill.K)< At t8e time o' t8e &ommission o' t8ealle2e &rime, petitioner an respon ent 9ere marrie . T8e s :se ent issol tiono' t8eir marria2e, in &ase t8e petition in Civil Case No. 50- G14 is 2rante , 9ill 8aveno e e&t on t8e alle2e &rime t8at 9as &ommitte at t8e time o' t8e s :sisten&e o't8e marria2e. In s8ort, even i' t8e marria2e :et9een petitioner an respon ent isann lle , petitioner &o l still :e 8el &riminall% lia:le sin&e at t8e time o' t8e&ommission o' t8e alle2e &rime, 8e 9as still marrie to respon ent.

    e &annot a&&ept petitioner s relian&e on Tene:ro v. Co rt o' AppealsK) t8att8e J i&ial e&laration o' t8e n llit% o' a marria2e on t8e 2ro n o' ps%&8olo2i&al

    in&apa&it% retroa&ts to t8e ate o' t8e &ele:ration o' t8e marria2e inso'ar as t8evin& l m :et9een t8e spo ses is &on&erne 7 7 7. (irst, t8e iss e in Tene:ro ist8e e e&t o' t8e J i&ial e&laration o' n llit% o' a se&on or s :se ent marria2eon t8e 2ro n o' ps%&8olo2i&al in&apa&it% on a &riminal lia:ilit% 'or :i2am%. T8ere9as no iss e


Crim Pro Outline New

Crim Pro Outline New

Documents
Crim Pro Digest

Crim Pro Digest

Documents
Crim Pro Rule 111

Crim Pro Rule 111

Documents
Crim Pro Full Texts

Crim Pro Full Texts

Documents
Short Crim Pro Outline

Short Crim Pro Outline

Documents
crim pro Rules

crim pro Rules

Documents
Crim Pro MBE Outline

Crim Pro MBE Outline

Documents
Full Case Crim Pro

Full Case Crim Pro

Documents
Crim Pro Midterm Exam

Crim Pro Midterm Exam

Documents
g's crim pro charts

g's crim pro charts

Documents
9213 Crim Pro Outline1

9213 Crim Pro Outline1

Documents
100127512 crim-pro-cases

100127512 crim-pro-cases

Education
235979371 crim-pro-cases

235979371 crim-pro-cases

Education
Crim Pro Reviewer

Crim Pro Reviewer

Documents
Crim Pro Outline1

Crim Pro Outline1

Documents
Crim Pro Cases_set 3

Crim Pro Cases_set 3

Documents
Outline Crim Pro

Outline Crim Pro

Documents
Crim Pro Slides

Crim Pro Slides

Documents
Cases Crim Pro

Cases Crim Pro

Documents
Crim Pro Outline 1.1

Crim Pro Outline 1.1

Documents
Crim Pro -Midterm PDF

Crim Pro -Midterm PDF

Documents
Crim Pro Digests 2015

Crim Pro Digests 2015

Documents
Crim Pro case digest

Crim Pro case digest

Documents
Notes on Crim Pro

Notes on Crim Pro

Documents
Crim Pro 2015 Cases

Crim Pro 2015 Cases

Documents
CRIM PRO Full Case

CRIM PRO Full Case

Documents
Crim-pro Meadows s05

Crim-pro Meadows s05

Documents
Crim Pro Cases

Crim Pro Cases

Documents
Crim Pro II Outline

Crim Pro II Outline

Documents
Crim Pro Review

Crim Pro Review

Documents