Case Digest (G.R. No. 157472)
Facts:
In SSGT. Jose M. Pacoy v. Hon. Afable E. Cajigal, People of the Philippines and Olympio L. Escueta, G.R. No. 157472, decided on September 28, 2007 under the 1987 Constitution, petitioner SSGT. Jose M. Pacoy was charged by Information filed on July 4, 2002 in RTC Branch 68, Camiling, Tarlac with Homicide for allegedly shooting and killing his commanding officer, 2Lt. Frederick Escueta, on or about March 18, 2002 in Mayantoc, Tarlac, with an Armalite rifle and inflicting multiple gunshot wounds, the Information alleging the aggravating circumstance of “disregard of rank.” On September 12, 2002, petitioner, assisted by counsel de parte, pleaded not guilty. Immediately thereafter, the trial court motu proprio ordered the prosecutor to amend the Information to Murder by correcting the caption and preamble, without changing the factual allegations. At the scheduled pre-trial on October 8, 2002, petitioner objected that the amendment would place him in double jeopardy, refused to pleaCase Digest (G.R. No. 157472)
Facts:
- Filing and Arraignment
- July 4, 2002: An Information was filed in RTC Branch 68, Camiling, Tarlac, charging SSGT Jose M. Pacoy with Homicide for shooting 2Lt. Frederick Escueta on March 18, 2002, with the aggravating circumstance of “disregard of rank.”
- September 12, 2002: Upon arraignment, petitioner pleaded not guilty; pre-trial and trial were set on October 8, 2002.
- Amendment to Murder
- September 12, 2002: The respondent judge sua sponte ordered the prosecutor to amend the Information to Murder, invoking the alleged qualifying aggravating circumstance.
- The prosecutor crossed out “Homicide” and wrote “Murder” in the caption and preamble; the factual allegations and jurisdictional averments remained identical.
- Motions and Orders on Double Jeopardy
- October 8, 2002: At the scheduled pre-trial, petitioner refused to plead to Murder; the court entered for him a plea of not guilty.
- October 28, 2002: Petitioner filed a Motion to Quash and to Suspend Proceedings, alleging double jeopardy; in an Order dated October 25, 2002, the judge denied the motion, holding that no conviction, acquittal or valid termination had occurred.
- December 18, 2002: Petitioner’s Motion to Inhibit and Motion for Reconsideration were resolved—Inhibition denied; Reconsideration granted on the ground that “disregard of rank” is only a generic aggravating circumstance, and the original Homicide Information stands.
Issues:
- Whether the respondent judge gravely abused his discretion by ordering the amendment of the Information from Homicide to Murder after petitioner’s plea.
- Whether the denial of the Motion to Quash on double jeopardy grounds was correct.
- Whether reinstating the original Homicide Information constituted a new jeopardy or abuse of discretion.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)