Supreme Court decision · Criminal Law
Luciano v. Wilson
G.R. No. L-31347 · Promulgated August 31, 1970 · Ponente: Reyes
In brief
This case is about the suspension from office of Acting Mayor Jose C. Luciano under the Anti-Graft Law and the requirement of a hearing on the validity of the criminal information before suspension.
Anti-Graft, Suspension, Preliminary Investigation, Due Process, RA 3019
Related cases
- G.R. No. L-30306 Luciano v. Provincial Governor (Cited in this decision)
- G.R. No. L-25845 Antonio and Dasalla v. People (Previous decision in Criminal Law)
- G.R. No. L-31622 Luciano v. Estrella (Next decision in Criminal Law)
Full text
[ G.R. No. L-31347. August 31, 1970 ]
JOSE C. LUCIANO, PETITIONER, VS.
JOHNNY WILSON, HON. ISIDRO S. RODRIGUEZ, AS PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR OF RIZAL, HON. HERMINIO C. MARIANO, JUDGE, CFI OF RIZAL, AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENTS.
R E S O L U T I O N
REYES, J.B.L., J.:
The present petition for quo warranto, injunction and prohibition, one of the several cases that this Tribunal has been asked to arbitrate, arising from the filing in court of graft-and-corrupt-practices cases against several municipal officials of Makati, Rizal, has been instituted by Jose C. Luciano, the incumbent Acting mayor of Makati, Rizal, to restrain (1) the enforcement of the order of the Court of First Instance of Rizal in Criminal Case No. 19346, suspending him from office, and (2) the appointment of and take-over by, respondent Johnny Wilson as Acting Municipal Mayor of the said municipality. For purposes of resolving the particular issues involved in this proceeding, the facts of the case may be stated as follows:
As a consequence of our decision in G. R. No. L-30306 (Jose C. Luciano vs. Provincial Governor of Rizal, et al.) promulgated on 20 June 1969, upholding the suspension from office, by the Court of First Instance of Rizal, of elected Mayor Maximo Estrella, Vice-Mayor Teotimo Gealogo, and Councilors Justino Ventura, Pedro Ison, Ignacio Babasa and Bernardo Nonato, among other accused, as a result of their having been found guilty of violation of Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), then ranking Councilor Jose C. Luciano entered into the office of and duly Qualified as Acting Mayor of Makati.
The records show,
however, that on 30 May 1969, or prior to his assumption of the mayorship, petitioner Luciano,
together with Florentino S. Rolls,[1] was himself charged with violation of the
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices law before the Court of First Instance of Rizal, in an information signed by then Provincial Fiscal
Benjamin H. Aquino (Criminal Case No. 19346). To forestall his suspension from public office,
Luciano filed with this Court on 3 June 1969 a
petition for prohibition[2] to restrain the Provincial Fiscal from
filing the information against him;
the Court of First Instance of Rizal from accepting
and/or giving due course to that information; and to have said information
declared null and void. The petition was
based on the allegations that the disputed information, although dated 29 May
1969, was actually transmitted to the Court of First Instance of Rizal only on 30 May 1969, the very day when the respondent
fiscal took his oath of office as judge of the Rizal
Court of First Instance; and that such criminal information was filed without
the respondent fiscal having conducted a preliminary investigation and without
giving the accused (petitioner) notice and opportunity to be heard. On 5 June 1969, this Court dismissed the
petition, but without prejudice to petitioner's filing with the court a quo of
an appropriate motion for the conducting of a preliminary investigation and for
the suspension in the meantime of the criminal proceedings.
Conformably with the aforesaid resolution, petitioner filed with the lower court a motion to allow
the holding of a preliminary investigation of the case, on the same grounds of
lack of preliminary investigation. On
As the provincial Fiscal B. Jose Castillo, however, manifested
that no reinvestigation of the case could be made without any petition to this effect from the accused, Luciano filed on
Finally, in a written manifestation dated 15 December 1969, the Provincial Fiscal informed the
court that he had conducted a preliminary investigation and/or reinvestigation
of the case, with notice to the parties, on 18 October 1969; that on said date,
counsel for the petitioner manifested that the evidence previously submitted to
State Prosecutor Edilberto Barot,
Jr. be considered and upon receipt of the respective memoranda of the Police
Commission and the petitioner, the case be deemed submitted for resolution; and
that taking into consideration the aforesaid evidence previously adduced
together with the memoranda of the parties, he (the fiscal) believed that there
existed sufficient evidence to establish prima facie the guilt of the
accused. On the same day, 15 December
1969, the court issued an order in Criminal Case No. 19346, suspending the
accused Jose C. Luciano from public office pursuant
to Section 13 of Republic Act 3019, "[I]t appearing that the information
charging the accused is sufficient in form and substance and the validity of
said information is apparent".
Immediately, the accused filed with the respondent court an urgent
motion for reconsideration of said order and for the holding in abeyance
of the suspension-directive. It also
appears from the record that at
In ascribing illegality to the 15 December order of suspension in this case, allegedly issued by the respondent Judge in grave abuse of discretion, petitioner invokes two grounds: (a) that he was denied his day in court when the respondent Judge reached the conclusion that the information is valid, without affording him opportunity to be heard; and (b) that the information does not charge an indictable offense under Republic Act 3019, and that no preliminary investigation was conducted in accordance with law.
After the case was submitted and while pending decision by this
Court, respondent Johnny Wilson filed, on 30 June 1970, a motion to the effect
that, abandoning his previous stand, said respondent was willing to confess
judgment in all material points relevant to the issue of holding a hearing to
determine the validity of an information filed under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt
practices Act, and consequently prayed that:
(1) he be allowed to withdraw his answers, memoranda and oral arguments
and to confess judgment on all material points contained in the petition; (2)
that the counterclaim be dismissed; (3) that the temporary restraining order
issued by this Court against respondent Judge Mariano be lifted; and (4) that said judge be ordered to hold a
hearing on the validity of the information
filed in Criminal Case No. 19346 of the Court of first Instance of Rizal, Branch X (People vs. Jose C. Luciano,
et al.). Counsel for other respondents,
required to comment, manifested conformity to
Considering that the basic stand of petitioner Luciano, assented to by respondent Wilson in his motion, that there should have been a hearing on the validity of the information, appears conformable to the spirit of the law, taking into account the serious and far reaching consequences of a suspension of an elected public official even before his conviction; and considering that public interest demands a speedy determination of the issues involved in this case as well as in the case pending against petitioner in the branch of the Court of First Instance of Rizal presided by respondent Judge Herminio Mariano, this Court is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. In the hearing thus to be held, petitioner's submission that the information charges no indictable offense and that no due preliminary investigation was made by the Provincial Fiscal, can be fully ventilated.
Accordingly, the Court resolves:
(1) To grant respondent Wilson's motion that the pleadings, counterclaim and memoranda filed by respondents be considered withdrawn;
(2) To
set aside the order of
(3) To direct said respondent Judge Mariano to forthwith hold a hearing on the validity of the information filed in said Criminal Case No. 19346 and the claimed lack of proper preliminary investigation, and determine such issues as soon as practicable; and
(4) Should he find in favor of the prosecution, to hear and decide the criminal case on its merits.
The preliminary writs of injunction heretofore issued are dissolved. No costs.
SO ORDERED.
Dizon, Makalintal, Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, and Villamor, JJ., concur.Concepcion, C.J., and Makasiar, J., took no part.
[1] Luciano's brother-in-law.
[2] G. R. No. L-30544, Jose C. Luciano vs. Provincial Fiscal of Rizal, et al.
[3]
The date of hearing had to be moved to