G.R. No. L-85, November 5, 1901
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. TAN JENJUA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
This is a petition filed by the attorney for the defendant-appellant, Tan Jenjua, seeking the reopening of the criminal case pursuant to Section 42 of General Orders, No. 58. The petition was filed directly with the Supreme Court after the case had been appealed and the record transmitted.

ISSUE:
Whether the petition to reopen the case based on newly discovered evidence should be granted.

RULING:
The Supreme Court DENIED the petition. The Court held that a reopening under Section 42 of General Orders, No. 58 is only permissible when there is genuinely newly discovered evidence. The evidence referred to in the petition did not qualify as such. The Court reasoned that if the accused or his counsel knew, or could have known through the exercise of proper diligence, the testimony of an absent witness, it cannot be considered newly discovered after the trial. Furthermore, the petition failed to comply with the procedural requirement of Section 42, as it was not accompanied by an affidavit setting forth the facts supporting the claim of newly discovered evidence. Additionally, an alleged error by the trial judge in administering an oath to a witness cannot be presented as newly discovered evidence. The Court denied the motion without resolving ancillary procedural questions regarding the finality of the judgment and the proper forum for the motion. Costs were taxed against the moving party.