G.R. No. 96027-28 - Custodio vs. Sandiganbayan

On November 23, 1968, at 6:00 a.m., Fortunato Medina, a Filipino citizen then in Saigon, South Vietnam, was arrested by the South Vietnam police and members of the Philippine Civic Action Group (PHILCAG) at the instance of the Philippine Military Attache.
He was held in custody in Saigon until 6:00 p.m. the same day and was flown under escort by two Philippine Military Attache personnel aboard an Air Vietnam plane to Manila, arriving about 9:00 p.m.
At Manila International Airport he was met and arrested by Intelligence Service officers of the Philippine Constabulary and taken to Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City, for interrogation.
On the morning of November 24, 1968, he was turned over to the 1st PC Zone Headquarters at Camp Olivas, San Fernando, Pampanga.
On November 27, 1968, he was transferred to the 174th PC Command Officer at Bano, Arayat, Pampanga, and at 11:00 a.m. the same day he was delivered to the custody of the Chief of Police of Arayat, Pampanga, in view of the absence of the Municipal Judge.

On November 29, 1968, Fortunato Medina, through counsel, filed a writ of habeas corpus petition directly with the Supreme Court to obtain his release from confinement in the Office of the Chief of Police of Arayat.
The Supreme Court issued the writ the same day and made it returnable to the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Quezon City Branch.
A trial on the merits was held on December 3, 1968, before Hon. Honorato B. Masakayan, Presiding Judge, Branch V, Court of First Instance of Rizal.
On January 2, 1969, Judge Masakayan rendered judgment ordering the respondents or whoever acted in their stead to immediately release Medina from custody.

On January 9, 1969, the Solicitor General filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals, stating that the trial court decision was not in accordance with law and evidence.
The trial court on January 15, 1969 ordered the record and evidence transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
On January 27, 1969, Atty. Amelito R. Mutuc, counsel for Medina, filed a "Motion for Certification of Appeal to the Supreme Court."
The Office of the Solicitor General opposed certification on the ground that questions of fact were involved and that certification would deprive appellants of due process.
The Court of Appeals denied the motion for certification in a resolution dated February 1, 1969.

On February 14, 1969, Atty. Amelito R. Mutuc filed an "Urgent Motion for Release" of Medina without bond during the pendency of the appeal.
The Solicitor General filed an opposition dated February 24, 1969.
By resolution dated March 13, 1969, the Court of Appeals denied the motion for release without bond and ordered that Medina be released pending appeal only upon filing a surety bond of P5,000.00.
A motion for reconsideration of the March 13 resolution was denied by the Court of Appeals in a resolution dated June 10, 1969.

Newspaper reports, alleged escape, and Court of Appeals show-cause resolution

On May 8, 1969, the Manila Times published an article attributing to Atty. Amelito R. Mutuc statements denouncing a division of the Court of Appeals and describing Medina's detention as illegal.
On May 9, 1969, the Manila Times reported that Medina had escaped from the Arayat municipal jail "upon advice of his counsel," and published a statement by Atty. Mutuc that he had advised ...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by the Solicitor General from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal ordering the release of Fortunato Medina, when the writ of habeas corpus had been originally filed with the Supreme Court and made returnable to the Court of First Instance.

Whether a petition for habeas corpus originally filed with the Supreme Court and made returnable to a Court of First Instance requires that any appeal on questions of fact be taken directly to the Supreme Court rather than to the Court of Appeals.
Whether the Court of Appeals lawfully denied the "Motion for Certification of Appeal to the Supreme Court" dated January 27, 1969.
Whether the Court of Appeals lawfully denied the "Urgent Motion for Release" dated February 14, 1969 and conditioned release pending appeal upon a P5,000....(Subscriber-Only)