G.R. No. 1898 : August 17, 1905

FACTS:
On February 23, 1904, the prosecuting attorney of Manila filed a complaint against William D. Ballentine, charging him with the crime of knowingly uttering a false and fraudulent Chinese certificate. The defendant was arrested and, the following day, filed a demurrer to the complaint, arguing that the facts alleged did not constitute a public offense and that the complaint did not conform to the prescribed form. The lower court sustained the demurrer, holding that the facts did not constitute the crime charged, and ordered the defendant’s discharge and the exoneration of his bail. The prosecution appealed this order. Subsequently, the defendant moved to dismiss the appeal, citing the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in United States vs. Kepner, which held that the Government could not appeal from a final decision in favor of a defendant in a criminal case without placing him in double jeopardy, as prohibited by the Philippine Bill (Act of Congress of July 1, 1902).

ISSUE:
Whether the Government’s appeal from a lower court order sustaining a demurrer to a criminal complaint is permissible, or if such an appeal is barred by the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy.

RULING:
The Supreme Court DENIED the motion to dismiss the appeal. It held that the Government’s appeal was valid under Philippine law and did not violate the double jeopardy clause.

The Court reasoned that a defendant is not placed in legal jeopardy by proceedings on a demurrer. Jeopardy attaches only when the defendant is put on trial under the following conditions: (1) upon a valid indictment or information; (2) before a court of competent jurisdiction; (3) after arraignment; (4) after pleading to the charge; and (5) in the Philippines (where jury trials were not held), after the trial has commenced with the calling of a witness. Since a hearing on a demurrer occurs before arraignment, plea, or the commencement of the trial, no jeopardy attaches.

The Court further held that the right of the State to appeal in a criminal case, absent a constitutional bar, is a matter of statutory grant. Section 44 of General Orders No. 58 expressly provided that “The United States may also appeal from a judgment for the defendant rendered on a demurrer to an information or complaint.” This statutory right of appeal for the Government from an order sustaining a demurrer was not repealed by the Philippine Bill’s double jeopardy provision, as such preliminary rulings occur before jeopardy attaches. Therefore, the precedent in United States vs. Kepner, which dealt with an appeal after a full trial and acquittal, was not applicable to an appeal from a pre-trial order on a demurrer.