CrimProc P.I. Cases 2
CrimProc P.I. Cases 2
CrimProc P.I. Cases 2
CrimProc
Atty. F. Sales
1
MAS
2
MAS
3
MAS
5
MAS
DANTE O. TINGA
Associate Justice
7
MAS
Footnotes
As replacement of Justice Leonardo A. Quisumbing who is on official leave per
Administrative Circular No. 84-2007.
*
Acting Chairperson.
**
Rollo, pp. 65-83. Penned by Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes with Associate Justices
Eugenio S. Labitoria and Rosalinda Asuncion-Vicente, concurring.
2
Id. at 84-85.
Sgt. Reyes, SPO2 Araas, John Does, and petitioners are collectively referred to as the
accused in this Decision.
5
Rollo, pp. 111-130. Signed by 3rd Asst. Provincial Prosecutor and OIC Esperidion R. Solano,
with 2nd Asst. Provincial Prosecutor Eulogio I. Prima recommending approval. Provincial
Prosecutor Agapito B. Rosales approved and signed the Joint Resolution.
6
Id. at 130.
Id. at 180-187.
Id. at 187.
10
11
Id. at 189-193.
12
Id. at 200-202.
13
14
15
CA rollo, p. 36.
16
MAS
19
20
21
22
Id. at 792-794. See also AAA v. Carbonell, G.R. No. 171465, 8 June 2007.
23
See Redulla v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 167973, 28 February 2007, 517 SCRA 110.
9
MAS
September 1, 2004
10
MAS
11
MAS
14
MAS
17
MAS
On official leave.
**
Acting Chairman.
Penned by Associate Justice Mercedes Gozo-Dadole, with Associate Justices Bennie A. AdefuinDela Cruz and Mariano C. Del Castillo, concurring.
18
MAS
Rollo, p. 263.
Id. at 11.
Id. at 134.
Id. at 136.
Id. at 140-142.
Id. at 139.
Id. at 174-176.
10
Id. at 177.
11
Id. at 179.
12
Id. at 502.
13
Id. at 195-197.
14
Id. at 182-190.
15
Id. at 193-194.
16
Id. at 229.
17
Id. at 233-245.
18
Id. at 246-248.
19
Id. at 249.
20
Id. at 251-252.
21
Id. at 253.
22
Id. at 254-262.
23
Id. at 267-270.
24
Id. at 271-306.
25
Id. at 307.
19
MAS
Id. at 340-341.
28
Id. at 68-69.
29
Id. at 70.
30
Id. at 26.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Id. at 70.
49
MAS
21
MAS
22
MAS
24
MAS
27
MAS
[1]
[2]
Orders dated June 10, 1998, September 22, 1998, and October 12, 1998; id., pp. 35-41.
[3]
[4]
[5]
Agreement of Nicolas B. Villaruz, Jr., Jose Ma. B. Villaruz, and Santiago B. Villaruz dated February
6, 1993; Records, p. 18.
[6]
[7]
[8]
Id., p. 41.
Rollo, p. 42; The Manual for Clerks of Court, p. 612 (1991) prescribed the form for Letters of
Administration as follows:
[9]
28
MAS
Affidavit of Santiago B. Villaruz dated March 25, 1999; Records, pp. 3-8.
[11]
[12]
[13]
Affidavit of Santiago B. Villaruz dated March 25, 1999; Records, pp. 3-8.
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
Sebastian, Sr. v. Garchitorena, 343 SCRA 463 (2000); Camanag v. Guerrero, 268 SCRA 473
(1997); Fernando v. Sandiganbayan, 212 SCRA 680 (1992).
[23]
Posadas v. Ombudsman, 341 SCRA 388 (2000); Venus v. Desierto, 298 SCRA 196 (1998);
Brocka v. Enrile, 192 SCRA 183 (1990).
[24]
[25]
Bunye v. Sandiganbayan, 306 SCRA 663 (1999); Ingco v. Sandiganbayan, 272 SCRA 563 (1997);
Ponce de Leon v. Sandiganbayan, 186 SCRA 745 (1990).
[26]
Avila, Sr. v. Sandiganbayan, 307 SCRA 236 (1999); Fernando v. Sandiganbayan, 212 SCRA 680
(1992).
[27]
[28]
Fonacier v. Sandiganbayan 238 SCRA 656 (1994); Alejandro v. People, 170 SCRA 400 (1992).
[29]
[30]
MAS
30
MAS
32
MAS
33
MAS
Footnotes:
See Affidavits of Isagani Ocampo and Amando Ocampo submitted to the police; CA Rollo,
pp. 34 and 36.
1
MAS
People v. Ramos, G.R. Nos. 101804-07, 25 May 1993, 222 SCRA 557; People v. Arce, G. R.
Nos. 101833-34, 26 October 1993, 227 SCRA 406; People v. Luwalhati, G.R. Nos. 105289-90,
21 July 1994, 234 SCRA 327, cited by the Court of Appeals in its Decision, Rollo, pp. 38-39.
6
See Note 6.
10
11
12
Roberts, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 113930, 5 March 1996, 254 SCRA 307.
Brocka v. Enrile, G.R. Nos. 69863-65, 10 December 1990, 192 SCRA 183; Allado v. Diokno,
G.R. No. 113630, 5 May 1994, 232 SCRA 192.
13
14
See Note 11. But see also Allado v. Diokno, Note 13.
36
MAS
38
MAS
41
MAS
44
MAS
45
MAS
46
MAS
47
MAS
48
MAS
50
MAS
52
MAS
56
MAS
62
MAS
63
MAS
65
MAS
66
MAS
67
MAS
69
MAS
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
To annul our law on sedition is to give license to those who seek the application of lawless
methods in the advancement of their political views. Our constitution surely does not
contemplate this.
Finally, the petitioners postulate that in the determination of the existence of probable cause from
the constitutional aspect, it is required that: "(1) The judge (or) officer must examine the **
witnesses personally; (2) The examination must be under oath; and (3) The examination must be
reduced to writing in the form of searching questions and answers. (Marinas v. Siochio, 104 SCRA
403)."
71
MAS
Footnotes
1
Rollo, p. 85.
Annex 1-id, "Comment to the Petition" of respondent Judge I Ignalaga rollo, pp. 79-8 1.
10
Rollo, p. 4.
11
12
13
Rollo, p. 28.
14
Id., p. 92-93.
15
MAS
18
19
Id., p. 9.
20
1973 Constitution.
21
22
Id., p. 140.
23
24
Id., pp. 64-104 (filed Nov. 13, 1985); see also, the comment filed on November 13, 1985 by
the other respondents, Capt. Modesto Sanson, Capt. Rafael Jugan, and Mayor Braulio
Lumayno: rollo, pp. 59-62.
25
26
Id., P. 68.
27
28
Id., P. 68-70.
29
Id., p. 70.
30
Id.
31
32
Id., p. 115-116.
33
34
35
36
37
Rollo, p. 172.
38
MAS
Emphasis supplied. As will be noted, the reference to "such other responsible officer as
may be authorized by law" is echoed in Sec. 2, Rule 112 earlier cited [footnote No. 38],
which mentions, as among those authorized to conduct preliminary investigation, "Such
Other officers as may be authorized by law."
41
42
Emphasis supplied.
43
44
See Martin, The New Constitution, etc,, with Notes & Comments (1973 ed.), pp. 485-486;
Feria, Civil Procedure (1969 ed.), p. 3.
45
46
Sec. 13, ART. VIII, 1935 Constitution; Sec. 5 [5], ART. X, 1973 Constitution; Sec. 5 [51, ART.
VIII, 1987 Constitution; SEE, HOWEVER, SEC. 10, ART XVIII.
47
48
49
50
51
Sec. 143, (2), Local Government Code, supra see also, footnote No. 15.
52
53
U.S. v. Ten Yu, 24 Phil. 1; Morfe v. Mutuc, 22 SCRA 424; Province of Pangasinan v.
Secretary of Public Works and Communications, 30 SCRA 134; Sand v. Abad Santos
Educational Institution, 58 SCRA 33.
54
55
rollo, p. 138.
See footnote No. 41 and related text, supra, The phrase, ,such other responsible officer as
may be authorized by law. " is also found in Section 2, Rule 112 of the 1985 Rules on
Criminal Procedure, which enumerates the officers authorized to conduct preliminary
investigation. But the 1935 Constitution (Sec. 3, Art. III), as already earlier noted, also
restricted the power to "the judge.
56
57
MAS
60
61
62
Annexes A and A-1, petition; Annexes 1-b and 1-c, Judge Ig nalaga's Comment.
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
76
MAS
78
MAS
83
MAS
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA
Associate Justice
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in
the above Decision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the
opinion of the Courts Division.
HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.
Chief Justice
Footnotes
1
Decision penned by Associate Justice Jose L. Sabio, Jr. and concurred in by Associate
Justices Delilah Vidallon-Magtolis and Hakim S. Abdulwahid. Rollo, pp. 72-85.
2
Rollo, p. 87.
Id. at 101-102.
Id. at 109-111.
Id. at 119-123.
Id. at 124-126.
Id. at 178-180.
Id. at 353-380.
10
Id. at 181.
84
MAS
Id. at 560-563.
13
Id. at 573-574.
14
Id. at 576-577.
15
Id. at 594-595.
16
Id. at 596-609.
17
Id. at 84.
18
Id. at 87.
19
Id. at 13-70.
20
Id. at 26-27.
21
22
Section 8, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended provides:
Sec. 8. Provisional dismissal. A case shall not be provisionally dismissed except
with the express consent of the accused and with notice to the offended party.
The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six
(6) years or a fine of any amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1) year
after issuance of the order without the case having been revived. With respect to
offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than six (6) years, their provisional
dismissal shall become permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order without
the case having been revived.
23
24
25
Manalastas v. Flores, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1523, 6 February 2004, 422 SCRA 298, 306-307.
26
27
Id. at 467.
28
Id. at 468.
29
MAS
Id. at 80.
32
Id. at 83.
33
Id. at 102.
34
35
Id. at 127-130.
36
37
G.R. Nos. L-31788 & L-31792, 15 September 1975, 67 SCRA 47, 58, citing Mondano v.
Silvosa, etc., et al., 97 Phil. 143 (1955).
38
39
40
Id. at 414-419.
41
Rollo, p. 594.
86
MAS
88
MAS
90
MAS
91
MAS
94
MAS
95
MAS
96
MAS
97
MAS
98
MAS
106
MAS