GR L 44189; (February, 1985) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-44189 February 28, 1985
MARLOU YGAY, FELIPE OGANG, JR., ROBERT PANE and ROBERT DELA TORRE, petitioners, vs. HON. ROMEO M. ESCAREAL, et al., respondents.
FACTS
Petitioners were charged with murder before the Circuit Criminal Court of Cebu for the killing of Lexter Lucero. The information alleged that the four accused were armed with a stainless knife and improvised forks. The Acting City Fiscal subsequently filed an urgent motion to withdraw the case, contending that under General Order No. 54, the case, allegedly involving a band, fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of a military tribunal. Respondent Judge Escareal granted the motion and ordered the case remanded to the military court. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing the transfer violated their constitutional rights, but it was denied.
Petitioners then filed this petition for certiorari and prohibition. They contended the remand deprived them of their right to be informed of the accusation, as the information did not explicitly allege a band or a violation of General Order No. 54. They also argued the fiscal committed grave abuse by charging murder instead of homicide without proper preliminary investigation and that the transfer to a military tribunal deprived them of their right to bail.
ISSUE
Whether the respondent judge acted with grave abuse of discretion in remanding the criminal case to the military tribunal based on General Order No. 54.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no grave abuse of discretion. The legal logic is anchored on the sufficiency of the information and the jurisdictional mandate of General Order No. 54. Under the Rules of Court, an information is sufficient if it states the defendant’s name, the statutory designation of the offense, the acts constituting it, the offended party, and the approximate time and place of commission. The information in this case contained all these elements. While it did not explicitly use the term “band,” the allegation that four defendants were armed with knives and forks effectively alleged the existence of a band as defined in General Order No. 54—three or more persons, at least one armed, for use in a crime. At the stage of determining jurisdiction, it is the allegations in the information that control. Since the allegations brought the case within the definition of an offense committed by a band, the military tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction under the then-prevailing General Order.
The Court also found petitioners’ other contentions without merit. The claim regarding the propriety of the murder charge involved factual issues not reviewable in a certiorari proceeding. The alleged denial of preliminary investigation was waived by petitioners through their counsel. Finally, the issue on the non-availability of bail in military tribunals was rendered moot by the subsequent return of the case records to the civil courts in 1977 pursuant to General Order No. 59. The Court thus ordered the Regional Trial Court of Cebu to proceed with the trial.