Case Digest (G.R. No. L-32282-83)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Hon. Mario J. Gutierrez, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, et al., G.R. Nos. L-32282-83. November 26, 1970. The Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, J.B.L., J., writing for the Court.In the early morning of May 22, 1970, a group of armed men set fire to several inhabited houses in Barrio Ora Centro, Bantay, Ilocos Sur; later the same day homes in Barrio Ora Este were also burned, and an elderly woman, Vicenta Balboa, was killed. After investigation, the provincial fiscal, aided by state prosecutors, filed two informations on June 10, 1970 in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Vigan, Ilocos Sur — Criminal Case No. 47‑V (arson with homicide) and No. 48‑V (arson) — charging seventeen named respondents and eighty‑two unidentified persons with burning occupied dwellings.
On June 15, 1970 two accused (Camilo Pilotin and Vincent Crisologo) posted bail, were arraigned before Judge Mario J. Gutierrez of the CFI of Ilocos Sur, pleaded not guilty, and trial dates were set for July 27–29, 1970. That same day the Secretary of Justice issued Administrative Order No. 221 authorizing Judge Lino Afiover (Circuit Criminal Court, Second Judicial District) to hold a special term in Ilocos Sur beginning July 1. On June 18 the Secretary issued Administrative Order No. 226 authorizing Judges Arciaga and Gutierrez to transfer Criminal Cases Nos. 47‑V and 48‑V to the Circuit Criminal Court under Republic Act No. 5179 and earlier Department Administrative Orders Nos. 258 and 274.
On June 22 the prosecution moved Judge Gutierrez to transfer the two cases to the Circuit Criminal Court, adducing affidavits of prosecution witnesses who refused to testify in Vigan for fear of reprisal and asking that hearings be held in San Fernando, La Union, or Baguio City. The accused opposed the motion, invoking the traditional rule that criminal actions must be tried in the province where the offense occurred (Rule 110, Sec. 14(a) Revised Rules of Court and decisions such as U.S. v. Cunanan). On July 20, 1970 Judge Gutierrez denied the prosecution’s motion, treating Administrative Order No. 226 as permissive rather than mandatory and observing that any change of venue under Section 4 of R.A. 5179 should have been sought at the inception of the cases.
The Solicitor General and State Prosecutors filed a petition in this Court for writs of certiorari and mandamus (seeking review of Judge Gutierrez’s denial), and sought a preliminary injunction; this Court enjoined the respondent judge from proceeding with the trial until further orders...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the Secretary of Justice have authority to transfer specified, individual cases from a Court of First Instance to a Circuit Criminal Court under Republic Act No. 5179 and the Department’s administrative orders?
- Do the Supreme Court and other courts possess an inherent power to transfer the place of trial from one court to another of equal rank within the same district when the interest of justice so demands?
- Did Judge Gutierrez commit grave abuse of discretion in refusing to transfer Criminal Cases Nos. 47‑V and 48‑V given the prosecution witnesses’ fear to testify in Vig...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)