Case Summary (G.R. No. 230018)
Procedural History
- RTC granted Escalona’s Motion to Quash on October 23, 2013, but paradoxically directed the prosecution to file an Amended Information within ten days.
- OCP Pasig filed the Amended Information 17 days later, dropping Escalona. Lazaro moved to expunge, asserting the RTC order had become final.
- The private prosecutor sought clarification; the RTC issued the First Assailed Order (August 4, 2014) amending its October 23 order to reflect intent to allow amendment rather than dismissal. Lazaro’s motion for reconsideration was denied (Second Assailed Order, January 21, 2015).
- Lazaro filed a Rule 65 Petition in the CA, which was denied in its June 16, 2016 Decision and February 15, 2017 Resolution.
- Lazaro elevated the case to the Supreme Court via Rule 45.
Issue
Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in affirming the RTC’s clarification and amendment of its October 23, 2013 Order.
Ruling
Petition denied. The CA Decision and Resolution are affirmed. The September 20, 2017 Temporary Restraining Order against the RTC proceedings is lifted.
Reasoning
- Order of October 23, 2013 did not dismiss the case but contained contradictory fallo and body. The body clearly stated the court’s intention to give the prosecution opportunity to amend under Sections 4 and 5, Rule 117. Under Rule 117, a motion to quash for failure to charge an offense mandates amendment, not outright dismissal, unless a defect is incurable or unamended.
- Jurisprudence (People v. Andrade; People v. Sandiganbayan) confirms that defects in information are curable by amendment and the prosecution must be afforded the chance to correct them.
- RTC’s First Assailed Order merely clarified its original intent, exercising its inherent power under Rule 135, Section 5, to amend and control its orders to conform with law.
- Belated filing of the Amended Information was within the RTC’s discretion under Rule 11, Section 11, which allows courts to extend deadlines on just terms. Courts may liberally con
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 230018)
Facts
- On October 25, 2009, Gian Dale Galindez allegedly jumped from the 26th floor of Renaissance 2000 Condominium, resulting in his death.
- At the time of the incident, Galindez was in the company of petitioner Norman Alfred F. Lazaro and their friend Kevin Jacob Escalona.
- Galindez’s father filed a criminal complaint for Giving Assistance to Suicide under Article 253 of the Revised Penal Code against Lazaro and Escalona.
- The Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasig City (OCP Pasig) found probable cause and filed an Information before the RTC.
Procedural History
- Lazaro and Escalona secured a favorable DOJ resolution on petition for review dated February 7, 2011; on motion for reconsideration, the OCP Pasig’s May 4, 2010 resolution was reinstated.
- An Information was filed on May 17, 2010; Lazaro was arraigned on February 9, 2011 and a plea of not guilty was entered for him.
- On August 13, 2013, Escalona filed a Motion to Quash (defect in facts charged); RTC granted it on October 23, 2013 but directed prosecution to file an Amended Information within ten days.
- The OCP Pasig filed the Amended Information on December 6, 2013—17 days after receipt of the RTC Order. Lazaro filed a Motion to Expunge.
- The prosecution filed a Motion for Clarification on March 28, 2014, pointing out the RTC Order’s contradictory dispositive and body. Lazaro again moved to expunge.
- On August 4, 2014, the RTC issued its First Assailed Order: it clarified the October 23, 2013 fallo, amended its dispositive to reflect intent to give prosecution ten days to amend before granting a quashal, and denied the motions to expunge.
- Lazaro moved for reconsideration of that order (September 29, 2014); RTC denied it in the Second Assailed Order (January 21, 2015).
- Lazaro filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 before the CA. The CA denied the petition in its Decision dated June 16, 2016, and denied reconsideration in its Resolution d