Case Digest (G.R. No. 223660) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Leviste vs. Alameda, petitioner Jose Antonio C. Leviste was charged with the homicide of Rafael de las Alas, who died on January 12, 2007. On January 16, 2007, the Makati Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 150, presided over by Judge Elmo Alameda, issued a commitment order and placed petitioner under police custody at Makati Medical Center. After posting a ₱40,000 cash bond, Leviste was released and scheduled for arraignment on January 24, 2007. The private complainants, heirs of the deceased, with the conformity of the public prosecutor, filed an Urgent Omnibus Motion seeking a reinvestigation to determine the proper offense. The RTC granted the motion by Orders of January 24 and January 31, 2007, deferring arraignment pending reinvestigation. Petitioner sought certiorari relief in the Court of Appeals (CA) and moved in the RTC to defer action and to inhibit Judge Alameda. Despite these, the RTC issued Orders of February 7 and 8, 2007, admitting an Amended Information for mu Case Digest (G.R. No. 223660) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Preliminary Proceedings
- On January 16, 2007, petitioner Jose Antonio C. Leviste was charged with homicide before the RTC of Makati City (Branch 150), committed to custody, then released upon posting a ₱40,000 bond. Arraignment was set for January 24, 2007.
- The heirs of the victim filed, with the prosecutor’s conformity, an Urgent Omnibus Motion for reinvestigation to determine the proper offense. The RTC issued:
- Order of January 24, 2007 deferring arraignment and allowing reinvestigation within 30 days.
- Order of January 31, 2007 denying reconsideration.
- Amended Information and Arraignment
- Petitioner filed certiorari/prohibition petitions and motions to defer action. Nonetheless, the RTC on February 7 admitted an Amended Information for murder and directed arrest; on February 8 set arraignment for February 13. Petitioner sought inhibition and judicial determination of probable cause.
- No injunction issued; arraignment held on March 21, 2007, where petitioner refused to plead and “not guilty” was entered for him. On May 21, 2007, bail ex abundanti cautela (₱300,000) was granted. Trial proceeded.
- Trial, Appeal, and SC Petition
- The RTC convicted petitioner of homicide on January 14, 2009 (6 years and 1 day to 12 years and 1 day). Appeal to the CA ensued; bail pending appeal was denied.
- Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari (G.R. No. 182677) challenging the reinvestigation orders, admission of the Amended Information, and lack of a hearing on probable cause. The OSG argued mootness after conviction.
Issues:
- Jurisdictional and Discretionary Questions
- May the prosecutor, after filing an Information, seek from the trial court a reinvestigation of the case?
- Can a private complainant move for reinvestigation absent a formal petition or prosecutor’s initiative?
- Procedural Remedies and Mootness
- Did petitioner’s participation in trial waive his objections to reinvestigation and amended Information?
- Did the trial court commit grave abuse of discretion in proceeding with arraignment despite the pending certiorari petition and absence of injunction?
- Probable Cause Determination
- Was the trial court obligated to conduct a hearing for judicial determination of probable cause before issuing the warrant?
- Does absence of new evidence in the reinvestigation invalidate the Orders admitting the Amended Information?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)