Case Digest (G.R. No. 116615)
Facts:
Ferdinand Cunanan, G.R. No. 116615, March 01, 1995, Supreme Court Third Division, Feliciano, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner is a police officer prosecuted for murder in Criminal Case No. 5708, originally filed on April 5, 1991, before Branch 46 (Judge Norberto C. Ponce) of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Fernando, Pampanga. The Information alleged petitioner’s membership in the Philippine National Police but contained no averment that the killing was committed in relation to his official duties. Petitioner pleaded not guilty; trial proceeded and, by Order dated November 4, 1993, the parties had presented evidence and were directed to submit memoranda, after which the case was deemed submitted for decision.On March 11, 1994, the Supreme Court in Republic v. Asuncion (231 SCRA 211) held that the Sandiganbayan has exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses by public officers committed in relation to their office when the prescribed penalty exceeds prision correccional (over six years) and that, where the Information lacks an averment of commission in relation to office, the RTC must hold a preliminary hearing to determine that material fact and, if present, transfer the case to the Sandiganbayan. Acting on that ruling, Branch 43 (Judge Hermin E. Arceo) conducted a hearing limited to whether the offense was committed in relation to petitioner’s office and, by Order of April 21, 1994, found that petitioner killed the victim while attempting to restore public order in his capacity as a policeman. Judge Arceo initially “dismissed” the RTC case for refiling with the Sandiganbayan but on May 23, 1994 modified the order to forward the complete records “as if it was originally filed with the said Court.” Judge Arceo inhibited from the case on May 24, 1994; the case was raffled to Branch 42 (Judge Pedro M. Sunga, Jr.), who on July 14, 1994 denied petitioner’s Opposition to transmittal and on August 18, 1994 denied reconsideration.
Petitioner sought certiorari relief in the Supreme Court, alleging grave abuse of discretion in the RTC judges’ orders transferring Criminal Case No. 5708 and transmitting the records to the Sandiganbayan, arguing (inter alia) that jurisdiction was fixed by the original Information which lacked the “in relation to office” averment, that prior case law (e.g., Deloso v. Dom...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the public respondent RTC judges commit grave abuse of discretion in ordering the transfer of Criminal Case No. 5708 and transmitting its records to the Sandiganbayan?
- Does the absence in the Information of an averment that the offense was committed in relation to the accused’s office preclude the Sandiganbayan from exercising exclusive original jurisdiction?
- Does transferring the case to the Sandiganbayan after trial had concluded and the case was submi...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)