Title
Pacoy vs. Cajigal
Case
G.R. No. 157472
Decision Date
Sep 28, 2007
A soldier charged with homicide after killing his commanding officer contested an amended charge of murder, alleging double jeopardy; the Supreme Court ruled the amendment was formal, not substantial, and dismissed the petition.

Case 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)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.