Title
People vs. Herdo
Case
G.R. No. L-55213
Decision Date
Oct 9, 1981
The Supreme Court upholds the acquittal of the accused in a frustrated murder case, citing double jeopardy despite acknowledging the judge's grave abuse of discretion in granting a new trial.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-55213)

Facts:

  • The case is People of the Philippines vs. Hon. Harold M. Hernando, et al., G.R. No. L-55213, decided on October 9, 1981.
  • The petitioner, the People of the Philippines, aimed to annul the Amended Decision of Judge Harold M. Hernando, which acquitted the accused: Cosme Calibuso, Ernesto Calibuso, and Rey Tubana.
  • The accused were charged with Frustrated Murder for stabbing Romeo Dukinal on November 27, 1978, at a beerhouse in Modiit, Dolores, Abra.
  • The stabbing resulted in a wound requiring medical attention but did not cause death.
  • During the trial, the accused pleaded not guilty, asserting a common defense of general denial.
  • On July 10, 1980, the trial court convicted the accused based on eyewitness testimonies, including that of Dukinal.
  • The Calibusos filed a motion for reconsideration on July 18, 1980, citing a variance between the charge and evidence.
  • They later submitted an Amended Motion for Reconsideration, introducing new evidence implicating another individual, William Gonzales.
  • The trial court granted a new trial based on this evidence, leading to an Amended Decision on August 1, 1980, which acquitted the accused.
  • The prosecution's motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting the People to file a petition for certiorari.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent judge committed grave abuse of discretion in granting the new trial and acquitting the accused.
  • However, the relief sought by the petitioner was barred by the principle of double jeopardy.
  • ...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Court found no deprivation of due process, as the prosecution had opportunities to present its case and cross-examine witnesses during the trial.
  • The judge's verbal order indicated that a new trial was granted, with the prosecution present and partici...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.