Case Digest (G.R. No. 127444)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Hon. Tirso D. C. Velasco and Hon. Honorato Galvez, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 2000, the Supreme Court En Banc, Bellosillo, J., writing for the Court.On the morning of an incident in San Ildefonso, Bulacan, shots were fired, killing Alex Vinculado and severely wounding his twin brother Levi and their uncle Miguel Vinculado, Jr. Three informations (one for homicide, two for frustrated homicide) were originally filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos against Honorato Galvez (Mayor of San Ildefonso) and Godofredo Diego (municipal employee). The complaints were withdrawn and refiled upgrading the charges to murder and frustrated murder; an additional information for illegal carrying of firearm under PD 1866 was later filed against Galvez.
Venue was transferred to the RTC, Quezon City; the consolidated cases were ultimately raffled to Branch 89, presided by Judge Tirso D. C. Velasco. On October 8, 1996 the trial court promulgated a consolidated decision: it convicted Diego of murder and double frustrated murder, but it acquitted Mayor Galvez for insufficiency of evidence on the homicide and frustrated murder counts, and found that the alleged act of carrying a firearm did not constitute a violation of law.
The Office of the Solicitor General filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court (invoking Sec. 1, Art. VIII of the Constitution) asking the Supreme Court to set aside the acquittal of Galvez for grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. The Government urged the Court to re-examine Philippine reliance on Kepner v. United States in light of later U.S. decisions such as United States v. Wilson and United States v. Scott, arguing that review of an acquittal is permissible where reversal would not require a retrial. The petition also contended that respondent judge misappreciated and deliberately disregarded material evidence.
Respondent judge had been...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 a proper remedy to annul a trial court's judgment of acquittal on the ground of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction?
- Does the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy permit appellate or extraordinary review of a judgment of acquittal that rests on an ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)