Case Digest (G.R. No. L-1518)
Facts:
El Pueblo de Filipinas v. Fortunato Borromeo y Otros, G.R. No. L-1518, November 27, 1947, First Division, Pablo, J., writing for the Court. The appeal concerns the trial court's refusal to allow the prosecution to amend the place alleged in Count III of the complaint in a criminal action.The underlying criminal prosecution was Criminal Case No. 3595, People of the Philippines v. Rufino Reyes, for treason. Count III of the complaint alleged that the accused, acting as informer or agent of the Japanese Imperial Forces, led an armed patrol to a raid "in the Municipality of Malabon, Province of Rizal," arresting four Chinese residents who were later brought to Fort Santiago. During trial the prosecution discovered by witness testimony that the raid had in fact occurred in Navotas, not Malabon. The prosecutor immediately asked permission to amend the complaint to replace "Malabon" with "Navotas."
The trial court (referred to in the decision as "the Tribunal del Pueblo") denied the prosecution's motion to amend on the ground that the accused was not duly informed of the charge as laid in Navotas. Upon the prosecution's motion for reconsideration, and after hearing arguments of both parties, the trial court again denied the request reiterating that the defendant had not been informed of the charge committed in Navotas.
The court below did not change any other factual averments of Count III. The trial court relied on the formal variance between the place alleged and the proof. The prosecution pointed out that the original informants and even the accused himself had earlier indicated Malabon; other witnesses later located the event in Navotas. The People argued that the change was a mere correction of the name of the place, did not alter the nature of the offense, and caused no prejudice to the accused, since the accused had been sufficiently informed of the nature of the acts charged and the court possessed territorial jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court's opinion reviews prior local and foreign authorities (including E. U. v. Betiong, E. U. v. Celis, E. U. v. Gabalde, E. U. v. Tan Goy, and excerpts from Wharton's Criminal Evidence and several U.S. decisions...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying the prosecution's motion to amend Count III of the complaint by changing the place alleged from Malabon to Navotas?
- Is the allegation of a specific town or place an essential ingredient of the offense in this case such that a variance between the complaint and the ev...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)