MAYOR BAI UNGGIE vs
HON JAPAL GUIANI
SC’s Full Text link: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/118821.html
FACTS:
A complaint for murder was filed before the
Criminal Investigation service command, ARMM Region, in connection with the
death of Abdul Dimalen, the former COMELEC registrar of Maguindanao. Provincial
prosecutor Salick Pandain a Resolution dismissed the charges of murder against
herein petitioners and recommended filing of information for murder against one
of the respondents, Kasan Mama. Respondent Judge ordered for further
investigation. Upon return of the records of the case it was assigned to Second
assistant Prosecutor Enok T. Dimaraw for further investigation. Prosecutor
Dimaraw, found a Prima Facie evidence, thus, recommended filing the charges
against Bai Unggie Abdula and Odin
Abdula.
ISSUES:
1.
Whether
the Second Information for murder filed is valid?
2.
Validity
of the Warrant of Arrest issued against petitioners.
HELD:
Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition are
Granted.
RATIONALE:
In order to disqualify a Judge on the basis
of Prejudice, petitioner must prove the same by clear and convincing evidence.
Rules of Court: No complaint or information
shall be filed or dismissed by an investigating Fiscal without the prior
written authority or approval of the Provincial or City Fiscal or Chief of
State Prosecutor. A complaint or information can only be filed if it is
approved or authorized by the Provincial or City Fiscal or Chief of State
Prosecutor.
Soliven
vs Makasiar,
In satisfying himself of the existence of probable cause, the Judge is not
required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses.
Ho vs
People,
In the case at bench, respondent admits that the issued Warrant is questionable
as there was no “reason for him to doubt the validity of the Certification made
by the Assistant Prosecutor that a Preliminary Investigation was conducted and
that Probable Cause was found to exist as against those charged in the
information filed.
DOCTRINE, the Judge shall:
1.
Personally
evaluate the report and the supporting documents submitted byt the fiscal
regarding the existence of Probable Cause and, on the basis , issue a warrant
of arrest
2.
If,
on the basis thereof he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscal’s
report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid
him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of Probable Cause.
Ho vs
People (Inting)
1.
DETERMINATION
OF PROBABLE CAUSE BY THE PROSECUTOR:
Whether there is a
reasonable ground to believe that the accused is guilty of the offense charge
and should be held for trial is what the prosecutor passes on.
Determination of
Probable Cause by a Judge: Warrant of Arrest
2.
The
Judge should decide independently, hence, he must have supporting evidence,
other than the Prosecutor’s bare report, upon which to legally sustain his own
findings on the existence of probable cause to issue an arrest order.
SC’s Full Text link: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/118821.html
FACTS:
A complaint for murder was filed before the
Criminal Investigation service command, ARMM Region, in connection with the
death of Abdul Dimalen, the former COMELEC registrar of Maguindanao. Provincial
prosecutor Salick Pandain a Resolution dismissed the charges of murder against
herein petitioners and recommended filing of information for murder against one
of the respondents, Kasan Mama. Respondent Judge ordered for further
investigation. Upon return of the records of the case it was assigned to Second
assistant Prosecutor Enok T. Dimaraw for further investigation. Prosecutor
Dimaraw, found a Prima Facie evidence, thus, recommended filing the charges
against Bai Unggie Abdula and Odin
Abdula.
ISSUES:
1.
Whether
the Second Information for murder filed is valid?
2.
Validity
of the Warrant of Arrest issued against petitioners.
HELD:
Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition are
Granted.
RATIONALE:
In order to disqualify a Judge on the basis
of Prejudice, petitioner must prove the same by clear and convincing evidence.
Rules of Court: No complaint or information
shall be filed or dismissed by an investigating Fiscal without the prior
written authority or approval of the Provincial or City Fiscal or Chief of
State Prosecutor. A complaint or information can only be filed if it is
approved or authorized by the Provincial or City Fiscal or Chief of State
Prosecutor.
Soliven
vs Makasiar,
In satisfying himself of the existence of probable cause, the Judge is not
required to personally examine the complainant and his witnesses.
Ho vs
People,
In the case at bench, respondent admits that the issued Warrant is questionable
as there was no “reason for him to doubt the validity of the Certification made
by the Assistant Prosecutor that a Preliminary Investigation was conducted and
that Probable Cause was found to exist as against those charged in the
information filed.
DOCTRINE, the Judge shall:
1.
Personally
evaluate the report and the supporting documents submitted byt the fiscal
regarding the existence of Probable Cause and, on the basis , issue a warrant
of arrest
2.
If,
on the basis thereof he finds no probable cause, he may disregard the fiscal’s
report and require the submission of supporting affidavits of witnesses to aid
him in arriving at a conclusion as to the existence of Probable Cause.
Ho vs
People (Inting)
1.
DETERMINATION
OF PROBABLE CAUSE BY THE PROSECUTOR:
Whether there is a
reasonable ground to believe that the accused is guilty of the offense charge
and should be held for trial is what the prosecutor passes on.
Determination of
Probable Cause by a Judge: Warrant of Arrest
2.
The
Judge should decide independently, hence, he must have supporting evidence,
other than the Prosecutor’s bare report, upon which to legally sustain his own
findings on the existence of probable cause to issue an arrest order.
No comments:
Post a Comment