Case Digest (G.R. No. L-9805-06)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-9805-06)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Dionisio Mabong, G. R. Nos. L-9805-06. March 29, 1957, the Supreme Court En Banc, Bautista Angelo, J., writing for the Court.
In the afternoon of May 20, 1955, in Barrio Rizal, Lianga, Surigao, rural policeman Rufo Verano heard that Dionisio Mabong had gone berserk. Verano saw Mabong stab Cipriano Tabel with a bolo; Verano clubbed Mabong, grabbed his bolo, tied him with a rope, and transported him by boat to Lianga where he delivered him to the chief of police. Mabong was kept in municipal custody thereafter.
On May 23, 1955, after investigation, Mabong was charged in two separate informations by the chief of police before the Justice of the Peace (J.P.) of Lianga. At the preliminary investigation before the J.P. Mabong pleaded guilty and the J.P. forwarded the two cases to the Court of First Instance. The provincial fiscal filed the formal informations required by law. When the Court of First Instance set the cases for arraignment, Mabong filed a motion to quash the informations and a petition for habeas corpus, alleging that his detention had become illegal because local authorities had failed to deliver him to the proper judicial authorities within eighteen (18) hours in violation of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
The trial court (Court of First Instance) denied the motion to quash and the petition for habeas corpus. From that denial Mabong appealed to the Supreme Court (the present appeal). The Court considered whether the delay in turning the accused over to judicial authorities rendered his detention and the subsequent prosecution invalid, and relied on earlier jurisprudence including Gunable v. Director of Prisons.
Issues:
- Was the detention of Dionisio Mabong illegal because local authorities failed to deliver him to the proper judicial authorities within eighteen hours as contemplated in Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code?
- If there was such a delay, did it require quashing the informations or the grant of habeas corpus, thereby rendering the prosecution invalid?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)