G.R. No. L-17210 November 30, 1962
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. TEODORICO DACO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS

A complaint for assault upon an agent of a person in authority was filed against Isidro Daco, Eustaquio Daco, Teodorico Daco, Isaias Daco, and Mario Edonga. It alleged that on September 12, 1959, in Busuanga, Palawan, they conspired to attack policeman Porfirio Feloteo while he was performing his official duty, inflicting less serious physical injuries. The Justice of the Peace Court of Busuanga conducted what it termed a preliminary investigation, receiving evidence from both prosecution and defense.
After this proceeding, the Justice of the Peace Court rendered a “decision.” It elevated the case against Isidro Daco to the Court of First Instance (CFI) but convicted the other four accused of the lesser crime of slight physical injuries, sentencing each to 10 days imprisonment. Subsequently, the provincial fiscal filed an information in the CFI charging all five accused with the original and graver offense of assault upon an agent of a person in authority. The four convicted accused moved to quash this information on the ground of double jeopardy, arguing that the new charge necessarily included the offense for which they had already been convicted and had served sentence. The CFI sustained the motion and dismissed the case, prompting the prosecution’s appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the plea of double jeopardy is valid, which hinges on the validity of the Justice of the Peace Court’s “decision” convicting the appellees.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the order of dismissal and remanded the case for further proceedings. The plea of double jeopardy cannot be sustained. For a valid claim of double jeopardy, one essential element is a previous judgment or final order rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction. The Court held that the “decision” of the Justice of the Peace Court was a nullity. Jurisprudence consistently rules that Justice of the Peace Courts have no jurisdiction to try, hear, and decide cases for assault upon a person in authority or their agent under Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code. Their authority is limited exclusively to conducting a preliminary investigation for such offenses.
The record confirmed that the Busuanga Justice of the Peace Court was only conducting a preliminary investigation. Therefore, its act of rendering a verdict of conviction for slight physical injuries, instead of merely determining probable cause and forwarding the case to the CFI, was void for lack of jurisdiction. Since the prior conviction was a legal nullity, there was no valid first jeopardy to speak of. Consequently, the filing of the information in the CFI for the correct and graver offense did not place the accused in double jeopardy. The CFI must proceed with the trial on the merits.