Title
Supreme Court
People vs. De Castro
Case
G.R. No. 104645
Decision Date
Jul 23, 1998
Accused charged with illegal recruitment; alias arrest warrant issued before preliminary investigation completion, upheld by Supreme Court as proper.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 104645)

Background of the Case

The criminal proceedings began in April 1991 when an information was filed against Ernesto Java y Palmares and an unidentified co-accused, later revealed to be Alelio Bernaldez Pen, for violations of the Labor Code regarding illegal recruitment. The prosecution alleged that both men conspired to recruit individuals for non-existent job opportunities without the necessary licenses.

Amendments to the Information

An Urgent Motion to Amend the Information was filed by the City Prosecutor on May 29, 1991, identifying Pen and clarifying the nature of the charges against him. Despite the identification of Pen, "John Doe" was inadvertently retained in the amended information. A second amendment was submitted on August 27, 1991, naming Pen as a co-accused and, due to the capital offense, recommended no bail.

Procedural Developments

Initial attempts to subpoena Pen were unsuccessful, leading the court to consider complaints based on the evidence of the complainants. On September 20, 1991, a warrant of arrest was issued against Pen by Judge Jose Aguirre. Pen subsequently filed a motion challenging the validity of a resolution concerning his preliminary investigation rights, but the case was later assigned to Judge Anita Amora De Castro after Aguirre’s transfer.

Motion for Preliminary Investigation

On January 14, 1992, Pen filed a motion for a preliminary investigation, emphasizing the legal requirement for such proceedings in cases cognizable by the Regional Trial Court. Judge De Castro granted this motion but issued an alias warrant for Pen’s arrest the following day, prompting him to file a petition for certiorari against the judge.

Legal Questions Raised

The primary issues in this case pertain to whether the respondent judge acted within her authority in issuing the warrant of arrest before concluding the preliminary investigation and whether she complied with the constitutional requirement for establishing probable cause.

Court's Analysis and Findings

The court held that the issuance of an arrest warrant does not require the completion of a preliminary investigation if the information has been filed and a

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.