8epubllc of Lhe hlllpplnes

SUkLML CCUk1
Manlla
SLCCnu ulvlSlCn
G.k. No. L-39962 Apr|| 7, 1976
1nL LCLL CI 1nL nILIINLS, plalnLlff-appellee,
vs.
kICAkDC 8LkIALLS, 8LNLDIC1C CUS1CDIC and A8LI1C CUS1CDIC, accused-appellanLs.

CCNCLCICN Ik., !"#
Appeal from Lhe declslon of Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance of LeyLe, 8ranch v, Crmoc ClLy, ln
Crlmlnal Case no. 362-0, convlcLlng Lhe accused 8lcardo 8erlales 8enedlcLo CusLodlo and
abllLo CusLodlo of Lhe crlme of murder, senLenclng each one of Lhem Lo Lhe penalLy
of !"#$%&'() +"!+",%-. and Lo [olnLly and severally pay Lhe helrs of SaLurnlna Conzales orcadllla
Lhe sum of 12,000.00 and Lo pay Lhe cosLs.
1

lL appears LhaL ln Crlmlnal Case no. 362-0 Lhe hereln appellanLs were charged wlLh Lhe crlme of
murder ln an lnformaLlon flled by Lhe ClLy llscal of Crmoc ClLy on november 22, 1974, allegedly
commlLLed as follows:
1haL on or abouL Lhe 13Lh of SepLember, 1974, aL around 9:00 o'clock ln Lhe
mornlng aL 8arrlo Mahayahay, Lhls clLy, and wlLhln Lhe [urlsdlcLlon of Lhls
Ponorable CourL, Lhe above-named accused, 8lCA8uC 8L8lALLS 8LnLulC1C
CuS1CulC and A8Ll1C CuS1CulC, consplrlng LogeLher, confederaLlng wlLh and
muLually helplng and aldlng one anoLher, wlLh Lreachery and evldenL
premedlLaLlon and wlLh lnLenL Lo klll, dld Lhen and Lhere wllfully, unlawfully and
felonlously aLLack, assaulL, sLrlke and sLab Lhe person of SA1u8nlnA
C8CAulLLA, wlLhouL glvlng Lhe laLLer sufflclenL Llme Lo defend herself, Lhereby
lnfllcLlng upon Lhe laLLer morLal wounds whlch caused her deaLh. ...
2

AL Lhe hearlng of november 26, 1974, appellanLs' counsel moved for a relnvesLlgaLlon of sald
ease, along wlLh Lwo oLher relaLed cases
3
whlch Lhe courL - /%( granLed, ln lLs Crder readlng as
follows:
Cn moLlon of ALLy. Abas counsel for Lhe accused and wlLhouL ob[ecLlon on Lhe
parL of llscal 8amon So !r., leL Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon of Lhls case lmmedlaLely Lake
place aL Lhe Cfflce of Lhe ClLy llscal and leL Lhe arralgnmenL and Lrlal be
posLponed unLll 0"#"12"! 3 -)4 5. 6789 aL 7:30 a.m. of each day, lf and when
Lhe llscal shall recommend LhaL Lhe case shall proceed afLer lL shall have been
relnvesLlgaLed, wlLh noLlce Lo ALLys. Abas and Corne[os as well as llscal Solls ln
open courL.
4

Cn uecember 3, 1974, Lhe Lrlal courL posLponed Lhe hearlng of Lhe case Lo uecember 17 and
18, 1974.
S
ln vlew of Lhe ClLy llscal's moLlon "for a defermenL of Lhe hearlng or Lrlal seL for
uecember 3 and 6, 1974 unLll such Llme Lhe 8LlnvLS1lCA1lCn shall have been LermlnaLed for
whlch Lhe resulL of sald relnvesLlgaLlon wlll be submlLLed Lo Lhls Ponorable CourL for lLs
resoluLlon ln Lhe premlses."
6

Cn uecember 6, 1974, however, Lhe Lrlal courL, 1(,% +!(+!'( cancelled Lhe aforesald hearlngs
on uecember 17, and 18, 1974, and, lnsLead, reseL Lhe arralgnmenL and Lrlal of Lhe case Lo
uecember 10 and 11, 1974.
7

AL Lhe hearlng of uecember 10, 1974, appellanLs counsel manlfesLed Lo Lhe courL LhaL pursuanL
Lo lLs approval of hls moLlon for relnvesLlgaLlon, Lhe ClLy llscal had seL Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon for
uecember 12, 1974 and had already lssued Lhe correspondlng subpoena Lo secure Lhe
aLLendance of Lhe wlLnesses.
8
neverLheless, Lhe courL - /%(.lssued an order seLLlng Lhe hearlng
of Lhe case Lo Lhe nexL day, uecember 11, 1974,
9
aL whlch hearlng, appellanLs' counsel
relLeraLed hls manlfesLaLlon LhaL slnce Lhe ClLy llscal had already ordered Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon on
uecember 12, 1974, Lhe sald relnvesLlgaLlon should flrsL be flnlshed and Lhe correspondlng
resoluLlon rendered Lhereon and submlLLed Lo Lhe courL before any Lrlal of Lhe case should Lake
place.
10

1he Lrlal courL, however, relylng on Lhe mandaLe of Lhe new ConsLlLuLlon LhaL "All persons shall
have Lhe rlghL Lo a speedy dlsposlLlon of Lhelr cases before all [udlclal, quasl-[udlclal, or
admlnlsLraLlve bodles"
11
re-scheduled Lhe hearlng Lo uecember 13, 1974.
12
lmmedlaLely
LhereafLer, Speclal Counsel 8osarlo 8. ollnes, ln represenLaLlon of Lhe ClLy llscal, manlfesLed
LhaL Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor, ALLy. rocadllla, be auLhorlzed Lo conducL Lhe case for Lhe
prosecuLlon.
When Lhe case was called for hearlng on uecember 13, 1974, counsel for Lhe appellanL asked
Lhe courL Lo walL for Lhe ClLy llscal Lo appear, slnce Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon of Lhe case had already
been LermlnaLed and Lhe llscal, lf glven a chance, mlghL be able Lo reporL on sald
relnvesLlgaLlon.
14
1he Lrlal courL, however, lnslsLed ln arralgnlng Lhe appellanLs.
1S
When
arralgned, Lhe Lhree appellanLs decllned Lo plead, saylng: "l am noL golng Lo answer Lhe
quesLlon because Lhe llscal ls noL yeL around."
16
1hereupon, Lhe Lrlal courL enLered a plea of
"noL CullLy" for each of Lhem.
17

1hereafLer, appellanLs' counsel agaln manlfesLed LhaL Lhe ClLy llscal was absenL and LhaL Lhey
could noL go Lo Lrlal wlLhouL Lhe flscal and hls reporL on Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon conducLed by
hlm.
18
noneLheless, Lhe Lrlal courL, ordered Lhe presenLaLlon of evldence by Lhe prlvaLe
prosecuLor slnce he had been prevlously auLhorlzed by Lhe ClLy llscal Lo handle Lhe case.
19

AfLer Lhe dlrecL examlnaLlon of Lhe wlLnesses presenLed by Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor, Lhe Lrlal
courL asked Lhe counsel for Lhe defense lf he deslred Lo cross-examlne Lhe wlLnesses.
AppellanLs' counsel, however, relLeraLed hls manlfesLaLlon LhaL Lhey would noL go Lo Lrlal unLll
Lhe ClLy llscal shall have submlLLed Lhe resulL of Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon Lo Lhe courL, and Lhe courL
each Llme ruled LhaL lL consldered such manlfesLaLlon as a walver on Lhe parL of Lhe appellanLs
Lo cross-examlne Lhe wlLnesses.
20

1hereafLer, Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor resLed Lhe case for Lhe prosecuLlon and Lhe courL called for
Lhe evldence of Lhe defense. Agaln, appellanLs' counsel manlfesLed LhaL Lhe appellanLs were noL
agreelng Lo Lhe Lrlal of Lhe case unless Lhey flrsL recelved Lhe resulL of Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon
conducLed by Lhe ClLy llscal.
21
Whereupon, Lhe courL consldered Lhe case submlLLed for
declslon and announced Lhe promulgaLlon of Lhe declslon on uecember 17, 1974.
22

When Lhe case was called on uecember 17, 1974, appellanLs' counsel manlfesLed LhaL Lhe
accused were noL ln conformlLy wlLh Lhe promulgaLlon of Lhe declslon on Lhe ground LhaL Lhey
dld noL agree Lo Lhe Lrlal of Lhe case.
23
noneLheless, Lhe Lrlal courL promulgaLed lLs [udgmenL on
Lhe same day.
24

Pence, Lhe appellanLs lnLerpose Lhls appeal, upon Lhe prlnclpal ground LhaL Lhey were denled
due process of law.
2S
1he SollclLor Ceneral agrees wlLh such conLenLlon and recommends LhaL
Lhe [udgmenL under revlew be seL aslde and Lhe case remanded Lo Lhe lower courL for anoLher
arralgnmenL and Lrlal.
26

We susLaln Lhe appellanLs. AfLer Lhe Lrlal courL granLed Lhe appellanLs' moLlon for
relnvesLlgaLlon, lL became lncumbenL upon Lhe courL Lo hold ln abeyance Lhe arralgnmenL and
Lrlal of Lhe case unLll Lhe ClLy llscal shall have conducLed and made hls reporL on Lhe resulL of
such relnvesLlgaLlon. 1haL was a maLLer of duLy on lLs parL, noL only Lo be conslsLenL wlLh lLs
own order buL also Lo do [usLlce ald aL Lhe same Llme Lo avold a posslble mlscarrlage of [usLlce.
lL should be borne ln mlnd, LhaL Lhe appellanLs hereln were charged wlLh Lhe serlous crlme of
murder, and conslderlng LhaL Lhelr moLlon for relnvesLlgaLlon ls based upon Lhe ground LhaL lL
was lellpe orcadllla (husband and faLher, respecLlvely, of Lhe Lwo deceased, SaLurnlna
orcadllla and Culrlno orcadllla) who was Lhe aggressor for havlng aLLacked and serlously
wounded appellanL abllLo CusLodlo
27
lL was enLlrely posslble for Lhe ClLy llscal Lo modlfy or
change hls concluslon afLer conducLlng Lhe relnvesLlgaLlon. When Lhe Lrlal courL, Lherefore,
lgnored Lhe appellanLs' manlfesLaLlons ob[ecLlng Lo Lhe arralgnmenL and Lhe Lrlal of Lhe case,
unLll afLer Lhe ClLy llscal shall have rendered a resoluLlon on hls relnvesLlgaLlon, buL lnsLead
consldered such manlfesLaLlons on Lhelr parL as a plea of rloL gullLy and proceeded Lo Lry Lhe
case, recelved Lhe evldence for Lhe prosecuLlon, and Lhen rendered [udgmenL agalnsL Lhem on
Lhe basls Lhereof, lL commlLLed a serlous lrregularlLy whlch nulllfles Lhe proceedlngs below
because such a procedure ls repugnanL Lo Lhe due process clause of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon.
28

8esldes, as correcLly polnLed ouL by Lhe SollclLor Ceneral, "whaL ls more deplorable and whlch
renders paLenLly lrregular all Lhe proceedlngs Laken ln Lhls case, was Lhe LoLal absence of Lhe
ClLy llscal and/or any of hls asslsLanLs or speclal counsel on uecember 13, 1974, when Lhe
appellanLs were arralgned and when Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor presenLed evldence and resLed Lhe
case supposedly for Lhe eople.
under Lhe 8ules of CourL, "All crlmlnal acLlons elLher commenced by complalnL or by
lnformaLlon shall be prosecuLed under Lhe dlrecLlon and conLrol of Lhe flscal."
29
ln Lhe Lrlal of
crlmlnal cases, lL ls Lhe duLy of Lhe publlc prosecuLor Lo appeal for Lhe governmenL.
30
As sLaLed
by Lhls CourL, "once a publlc prosecuLor has been enLrusLed wlLh Lhe lnvesLlgaLlon of a case and
has acLed Lhereon by flllng Lhe necessary lnformaLlon ln courL he ls b law ln duLy bound Lo Lake
charge Lhereof unLll lLs flnally LermlnaLlon, for under Lhe law he assumes full responslblllLy for
hls fallure or success slnce he ls Lhe one more adequaLely prepared Lo pursue lL Lo lLs
LermlnaLlon."
31
Whlle Lhere ls noLhlng ln Lhe rule of pracLlce and procedure ln crlmlnal cases
whlch denles Lhe rlghL of Lhe flscal, ln Lhe exerclse of a sound dlscreLlon, Lo Lurn over Lhe acLlve
conducL of Lhe Lrlal Lo a prlvaLe prosecuLor,
32
neverLheless, hls duLy Lo dlrecL and conLrol Lhe
prosecuLlon of crlmlnal cases requlres LhaL he musL be presenL durlng Lhe proceedlngs. 1hus, ln
Lhe case of :"(+$" ;&< =%)-!
33
Lhls CourL upheld Lhe rlghL of Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor Lhereln Lo
conducL Lhe examlnaLlon of Lhe wlLnesses because Lhe governmenL prosecuLors were presenL
aL Lhe hearlng, hence, Lhe prosecuLlon of Lhe case remalned under Lhelr dlrecL supervlslon and
conLrol.
ln Lhe presenL case, alLhough Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor had prevlously been auLhorlzed by Lhe
speclal counsel 8osarlo 8. ollnes Lo presenL Lhe evldence for Lhe prosecuLlon, neverLheless, ln
vlew of Lhe absence of Lhe ClLy llscal aL Lhe hearlng on uecember 13, 1974, lL cannoL be sald
LhaL Lhe prosecuLlon of Lhe case was under Lhe conLrol of Lhe ClLy llscal. lL follows LhaL Lhe
evldence presenLed by Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor aL sald hearlng could noL be consldered as
evldence for Lhe plalnLlff, Lhe eople of Lhe hlllpplnes. 1here was, Lherefore, no evldence aL all
Lo speak of whlch could have been Lhe basls of Lhe declslon of Lhe Lrlal courL.
Moreover, as apLly observed by Lhe SollclLor Ceneral, "Lo permlL such prosecuLlon of a crlmlnal
case by Lhe prlvaLe prosecuLor wlLh Lhe flscal ln -2&"),'- can seL an obnoxlous precedenL LhaL
can be Laken advanLage of by some lndolenL members of Lhe prosecuLlng arm of Lhe
governmenL as well as Lhose who are obllvlous of Lhelr bounden duLy Lo see Lo lL noL only LhaL
Lhe gullLy should be convlcLed, buL LhaL Lhe lnnocenL should be acqulLLed - a duLy LhaL can
only be effecLlvely and slncerely performed lf Lhey acLlvely parLlclpaLe ln Lhe conducL of Lhe
case, especlally ln Lhe examlnaLlon of Lhe wlLnesses and Lhe presenLaLlon of documenLary
evldence for boLh parLles."
34

WnLkLICkL, the dec|s|on appea|ed from |s hereby SL1 ASIDL and the CASL kLMANDLD to
the tr|a| court for another arra|gnment and tr|a|. Costs $% '()*)'.
SC CkDLkLD.


G.k. No. L-39962 March 3, 1977
1nL LCLL CI 1nL nILIINLS, plalnLlff-appellee,
vs.
kICAkDC 8LkIALLS, 8LNLDIC1C CUS1CDIC and A8LI1C CUS1CDIC, accused-appellanLs.

8 L S C L u 1 l C n

CCNCLCICN Ik., !"#+,-"./0123.
1he CourL's aLLenLlon has been called Lo Lhe facL LhaL Lhe declslon ln Lhls case has been
lnLerpreLed ln prosecuLlon clrcles ln such manner as may cause Lhe obsLrucLlon of Lhe
admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlce. Pence, a clarlflcaLlon and a resLaLemenL of some of Lhe prlnclples
Lhereln lnvolved are ln order.
ln Lhls case, whlch lnvolved a prosecuLlon ln Lhe CourL of llrsL lnsLance, Lhe CourL ruled, '),"!
-$'-, LhaL Lhe flscal's duLy Lo dlrecL and conLrol Lhe prosecuLlon of crlmlnal cases requlres LhaL
he musL be presenL durlng Lhe proceedlngs, and LhaL evldence presenLed by Lhe prlvaLe
prosecuLor aL a hearlng, aL whlch nelLher Lhe flscal nor hls asslsLanL or duly auLhorlzed speclal
counsel was offlclally presenL, cannoL be consldered as evldence for Lhe eople of Lhe
hlllpplnes. 1hls pronouncemenL, as can be clearly deduced Lherefrom, applles Lo Lhe Lrlal and
prosecuLlon of crlmlnal cases before Lhe CourLs of llrsL lnsLance, Crlmlnal ClrculL CourLs, and
ClLy CourLs (whlch are provlded by law wlLh Lhelr own ClLy llscals) only, and noL Lo Lhe
munlclpal courLs.
1he procedure ln Lhe Lrlal of crlmlnal cases before Lhe munlclpal courLs and ClLy CourLs whlch
do noL have Lhelr own ClLy llscals has noL ln any way been alLered or modlfled by Lhe
pronouncemenL ln Lhls case. under Sec. 2, 8ule 110
1
of Lhe 8evlsed 8ules of CourL, and ln Lhe
llghL of Lhe rullng ln Lhe cases of :<:<>< ;&< ?$;-!"@ and :<:<>< ;&< :"!"@. ", -$<.
2
pollce,
consLabulary, and oLher peace or law enforcemenL offlcers and prlvaLe prosecuLors may
prosecuLe crlmlnal cases ln Lhe sald courLs, buL Lhls auLhorlLy ceases upon acLual lnLervenLlon of
Lhe provlnclal or ClLy llscal or Lhelr asslsLanLs, or upon Lhe elevaLlon of Lhe case Lo Lhe CourL of
llrsL lnsLance.