GR L 37603; (March, 1982) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-37603 March 15, 1982
CONSUELO LAZARO, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, HON. ALFREDO C. REYES and FISCAL MANUEL R. MAZA, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Consuelo Lazaro was charged with parricide before the Circuit Criminal Court of Cabanatuan City. She filed a motion to quash the information on jurisdictional grounds, which was denied. Subsequently, the case records were forwarded to the Military Tribunals upon advice from military prosecutors, citing exclusive jurisdiction over offenses involving illegal possession of firearms under Presidential Decree No. 9. The Military Commission then filed an amended charge sheet against Lazaro for “Illegal Possession of Firearm used in Parricide,” a capital offense. After trial, the Military Tribunal found her guilty and imposed the death penalty, with the case pending review by the Military Board of Review.
Following the military proceedings, the records were returned to the Circuit Criminal Court, which then set the original parricide case for trial. Lazaro moved to dismiss the parricide case on the ground of double jeopardy, arguing that she had already been convicted for an offense that included parricide as an essential element. The respondent judge denied her motion to dismiss, prompting the filing of this petition for certiorari and prohibition to annul the orders denying both the motion to quash and the motion to dismiss.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the subsequent prosecution for parricide in the civil court would place the petitioner in double jeopardy, given her prior conviction by the Military Tribunal for the offense of “Illegal Possession of Firearm used in Parricide.”
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that further prosecution for parricide constitutes double jeopardy. The Court first affirmed that the Military Tribunals validly exercised exclusive jurisdiction over the offense of illegal possession of an unlicensed firearm used in a killing, as provided under General Order No. 12 and Presidential Decree No. 9. The offense for which Lazaro was convicted, “Illegal Possession of Firearm used in Parricide,” is a single, integrated crime where the use of the unlicensed firearm to commit parricide is a qualifying circumstance mandating the death penalty.
The legal logic is grounded in the identity of offenses under the constitutional protection against double jeopardy. To secure a conviction for the qualified offense of illegal possession, the prosecution was compelled to prove all the elements of parricide as an integral component. Consequently, parricide is deemed absorbed into the greater offense. Subjecting Lazaro to another trial for parricide would require re-litigating the same facts and essential elements already adjudicated, thereby exposing her to a second punishment for the same act. The Court nullified the challenged orders and ordered the dismissal of the parricide case.