Case Summary (G.R. No. 186403)
Procedural History
Samonte was arraigned and pleaded self-defense. After Priscilla’s affidavits, the provincial prosecutor issued a January 2009 resolution finding probable cause to add Corpus as co-accused for murder by conspiracy. A rival resolution by an assistant prosecutor dismissed the complaint against Corpus. A motion to amend the original information was filed before the RTC, and on February 26, 2009, Judge Pamular granted it, admitted the amended information, and issued a warrant against Corpus. Corpus and Samonte then filed a Rule 65 petition in the Supreme Court challenging that order.
Issues
- Whether petitioners must first file a motion for reconsideration before seeking certiorari.
- Whether Judge Pamular abused discretion by proceeding on the amended information and issuing a warrant despite a pending DOJ review.
- Whether the 60-day suspension under Rule 116, Sec. 11(c) precluded further proceedings.
- Whether the addition of Corpus and the conspiracy theory constituted a prejudicial substantial amendment after plea.
- Whether the warrant issuance complied with the judge’s personal probable-cause determination under the Constitution.
Jurisdictional Requirement to File Motion for Reconsideration
Rule 65 certiorari requires absence of a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy; a motion for reconsideration before the RTC is normally mandatory. No such motion was shown on record. No compelling exception applied. Failure to file the requisite motion rendered the petition procedurally defective.
Determination of Probable Cause and Issuance of Warrant
Under Rule 112, Sec. 6 (1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec. 2), the judge must personally evaluate the prosecutor’s resolution and supporting evidence. Judge Pamular reviewed the original and amended information, heard parties at a February 13, 2009 hearing, and expressly found probable cause to issue the warrant. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused attached with the warrant’s issuance.
Suspension of Arraignment under Rule 116
Rule 116, Sec. 11(c) allows suspension of arraignment while a petition for review of the prosecutor’s resolution is pending before the DOJ, not exceeding 60 days. Petitioners’ DOJ appeal was filed on February 9, 2009; sixty days lapsed on April 10, 2009. After expiration, the RTC was obliged to deny their motion to suspend and proceed with arraignment and further proceedings.
Formal vs. Substantial Amendment under Rule 110
Rule 110, Sec. 14 permits only formal amendments after plea that do not prejudice the accused. A substantial amendment alters the offense’s nature, defense strategy, or increases potential penalty. The amended information added Corpus as co-accused and alleged “conspiring and confederating together,” but did not change the core theory that Samonte willfully shot the victim, nor did it raise a higher penalty. The addition was formal, not substantial—applicable under Casey and Court of Appeals.
Double Jeopardy and Due Process Considerations
Arraignment and plea trigger jeopardy and the right to be informed of charges.
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 186403)
Facts
- On June 4, 2008, Angelito Espinosa was shot by Carlito Samonte at Corpuz Street, Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija, resulting in Espinosa’s death.
- Samonte was arrested in flagrante delicto. On June 5, 2008, an Information for murder was filed against him; he entered an admission of the killing but pleaded self-defense.
- Mrs. Priscilla Alcantara-Espinosa, the victim’s wife, and various witnesses filed affidavits implicating Mayor Amado “Jong” Corpus, Jr. (“Corpus”) as having conspired with Samonte.
- On October 7, 2008, the provincial prosecutor dismissed the complaint and the attached affidavits. After motions for reconsideration and a reinvestigation, Officer-in-Charge Florendo on January 26, 2009 found probable cause to indict Corpus and directed filing of an Amended Information charging Samonte and Corpus as co-conspirators.
- Assistant Prosecutor Bonifacio issued a conflicting resolution reinstating dismissal of the murder complaint against Corpus. The prosecution nevertheless filed a Motion to Amend Information before the RTC.
- On February 26, 2009, RTC Judge Pamular granted the prosecution’s motion, admitted the Amended Information, and issued a warrant of arrest for Corpus, denying any suspension of proceedings despite a pending Petition for Review before the Department of Justice (DOJ).
- Corpus and Samonte filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 before the Supreme Court on March 3, 2009 and obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) on March 9, 2009 enjoining enforcement of the February 26, 2009 Order and warrant.
Procedural History
- Inquest proceeding → original Information for murder against Samonte → arraignment and plea of self-defense → presentation of prosecution witnesses.
- Wife of the deceased filed multiple affidavits after prosecution’s second witness.
- October 7, 2008: Provincial prosecutor dismisses complaint and witness affidavits.
- Motion for reconsideration → Florendo rescinds dismissal → Bonifacio directed to review but fails to comply → Florendo’s January 26, 2009 resolution finds probable ca