Case Digest (G.R. No. 153650)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Romeo Doriquez, G.R. Nos. L-24444 and L-24445. July 29, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Ruiz Castro, J., writing for the Court.The People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee) charged Romeo Doriquez (defendant-appellant) with two separate criminal informations arising from events in Batad, Iloilo. On August 28, 1964 Doriquez was charged with grave oral defamation (allegedly uttering insulting words against Attorney Sixto Demaisip on April 22, 1964). Six days later, on September 3, 1964, he was indicted for two counts of discharge of a firearm allegedly fired at Attorney Demaisip on the same date-range.
Upon arraignment Doriquez pleaded not guilty to both informations. On December 3, 1964 he moved to dismiss both informations, asserting (1) lack of jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance over grave oral defamation because, he argued, municipal courts had exclusive jurisdiction under the statute enlarging municipal/city court jurisdiction, and (2) that prosecution for discharge of firearm subjected him to double jeopardy because the municipal court of Batad had previously entertained and dismissed, without his consent, a complaint for alarm and scandal based on the same facts.
The Court of First Instance of Iloilo denied the motion to dismiss in an order dated March 8, 1965, and denied reconsideration on March 20, 1965. Doriquez appealed from those orders to the Supreme Court. The Court first characterized the appeal as prem...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the appeal from the trial court’s orders denying the motion to dismiss premature and therefore not appealable?
- Did the Court of First Instance of Iloilo lack jurisdiction over the charge of grave oral defamation?
- Did Doriquez's prior municipal-court proceeding for alarm and scandal bar prosecution for discharge of firearm ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)