Title
Go y Tambunting vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 101837
Decision Date
Feb 11, 1992
Rolito Go unlawfully arrested six days after shooting Eldon Maguan; Supreme Court ruled warrantless arrest invalid, upheld Go’s right to preliminary investigation, and ordered release on bail pending probe.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 101837)

Factual Background

On July 2, 1991, petitioner drove the wrong way on a one-way street in San Juan, Metro Manila, nearly collided with Maguan’s car, then exited his vehicle and shot Maguan. A nearby guard noted the assailant’s plate number. Police recovered a 9 mm shell and live round; plate records linked the car to petitioner’s spouse. Investigation led to petitioner’s identification by a bakery guard after he dined there.

Detention and Initial Charging

On July 8, 1991, petitioner, escorted by counsel, presented himself at San Juan Police Station. He was detained after a station-house eyewitness identified him. The same day, a frustrated homicide complaint was filed. Petitioner refused to waive Article 125 rights. Maguan died July 9; on July 11 the prosecutor filed an information for murder without preliminary investigation and recommended no bail.

Bail and Preliminary Investigation Motions

Petitioner filed an omnibus motion on July 11 seeking immediate release and a preliminary investigation. The provincial prosecutor recommended bail at ₱100,000. On July 12 the trial court approved bail; on July 16 it granted the prosecutor leave to conduct preliminary investigation. On July 17 the judge motu proprio rescinded both orders and set bail for hearing.

Arraignment, Habeas Petition, and CA Decisions

Petitioner’s certiorari and prohibition petitions to restrain the July 17 order were remanded. He was arraigned August 23; he refused to plead and a “not guilty” plea was entered. He filed a habeas corpus petition August 27; the CA issued the writ August 30 but later denied both petitions on September 23, 1991, upholding lawful warrantless arrest, waiver by bail posting, and the trial court’s process control.

Issues for Supreme Court Review

  1. Lawfulness of petitioner’s warrantless arrest.
  2. Validity of any waiver of petitioner’s right to preliminary investigation.

Legal Framework on Warrantless Arrest

Under Rule 113, Sec. 5, arrest without warrant is lawful only when the offense is committed in the officer’s presence or “just been committed” and based on personal knowledge. Under Rule 112, Sec. 7, a lawfully arrested accused may be charged without preliminary investigation, subject to waiver requirements.

Analysis on Lawful Arrest

Petitioner’s detention occurred six days after the shooting; arresting officers lacked personal knowledge and were not present at the crime. The “just committed” exception did not apply. Consequently, there was no lawful warrantless arrest under Rules 113 and 112.

Legal Framework on Preliminary Investigation

Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code and Rule 112 guarantee an accused the right to preliminary investigation before trial. Waiver must be explicit, signed, and accompanied by counsel or responsible person.

Analysis on Waiver of Preliminary Investigation

Petitioner consistently demanded preliminary investigation from the outset. His omnibus motion, filed the same day as the information, effectively informed both prosecutor and court of his demand within the five-day reglementary period. He did not fail to invoke or properly contest the right. There was no voluntary, informed waiver.

Impact on Bail and Trial Proceedings

The trial court’s recall of

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.