Case Digest (G.R. No. L-31665)
Facts:
In Leonardo Almeda (alias Nardong Paa) v. Hon. Onofre A. Villaluz and Hon. Gregorio Pineda (G.R. No. L-31665, August 6, 1975), the petitioner was charged with qualified theft of a motor vehicle in Pasig, Rizal (Criminal Case No. 285-Pasay) before Judge Villaluz of the Circuit Criminal Court. Bail was set at ₱15,000 and ordered to be posted entirely in cash. On February 18, 1970, Almeda moved orally to post a surety bond instead; the court denied both his motion and a subsequent oral motion for reconsideration, citing allegations of habitual delinquency and recidivism. At the same hearing, the City Fiscal, through an assistant, moved orally to amend the information to include those allegations. Despite objections that the amendment was premature, should have been in writing, and would violate double jeopardy, the trial judge allowed it and the assistant fiscal annotated the original information. Almeda’s motions to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds and for reconsideration were dCase Digest (G.R. No. L-31665)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner
- Leonardo Almeda (alias “Nardong Paa”), accused of qualified theft of a motor vehicle (Criminal Case No. 285-Pasay).
- Respondents
- Hon. Onofre A. Villaluz, Presiding Judge, Circuit Criminal Court, Seventh Judicial District, Pasig, Rizal.
- Hon. Gregorio Pineda, City Fiscal of Pasay City.
- Proceedings in the Trial Court
- Bail Requirement
- Trial court fixed bail at ₱15,000 and ordered it posted entirely in cash.
- On February 18, 1970, petitioner moved to substitute a surety bond for the cash bond; motion was denied, including oral reconsideration.
- Amendment of Information
- At the same hearing, the City Fiscal moved orally to amend the information to allege habitual delinquency and recidivism.
- Petitioner objected on grounds of prematurity, lack of written motion, and double jeopardy; the judge granted the amendment orally and annotated it on the back of the original information.
- Petitioner’s Recourse
- Petitioner sought dismissal for double jeopardy; denied in open court.
- Petitioner filed a special civil action for certiorari with preliminary injunction before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Bail
- Whether the trial court had authority to require a strictly cash bond and disallow a surety bond for provisional liberty.
- Amendment of Information
- Whether the amendment, after petitioner’s plea of not guilty, was proper in both substance and procedure.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)