GR L 3580; (March, 1950) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-3580; March 22, 1950
CONRADO CARMELO, petitioner-appellant, vs. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL, respondent-appellees.
FACTS
Petitioner Conrado Carmelo was charged with frustrated homicide on December 27, 1949. He pleaded not guilty on December 29, 1949. Later that same day, the victim died from his wounds. The prosecution obtained evidence of death on January 3, 1950, and filed an amended information for consummated homicide on January 4, 1950. Carmelo moved to quash the amended information on the ground of double jeopardy, which the trial court denied. He then filed this petition for prohibition to enjoin the trial from proceeding on the amended information.
ISSUE
Whether the filing of the amended information for consummated homicide, after the accused had pleaded not guilty to frustrated homicide and the victim subsequently died, places the accused in double jeopardy.
RULING
No. The amended information does not place the accused in double jeopardy. The constitutional protection against double jeopardy applies only when the second prosecution is for the same or identical offense. Here, the offense of homicide did not exist at the time of the first prosecution for frustrated homicide; it came into existence only upon the supervening fact of the victim’s death, for which the accused is responsible. This new fact, together with the facts existing at the time, constitutes a new and distinct offense. The ruling is based on the doctrine in Diaz vs. U.S. and People vs. Espino. Consequently, the Court expressly overruled the contrary doctrine in People vs. Tarok and People vs. Villasis. The petition is denied, and the trial court may proceed with the case under the amended information.
AI Generated by Armztrong.