Cacho, Julian Paul S.

Section 13. Duplicity of the offense

What is Duplicity of offenses? Duplicity of Offense in an information or complaint means the joinder of two or more SEPARATE and DISTINCT or DIFFERENT offenses in one and the same information or complaint. Rule on Duplicity of offenses General Rule: The information is defective when it charges two or more distinct or different offenses. A complaint or information must charge only one offense. Exceptions: when the law provides only one punishment for the various offenses. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Complex crimes; Special complex crimes; Continuous crimes or delicto continuado; Crimes susceptible of being committed in various modes; Crimes of which another offenses is an ingredient

Purpose: To give the defendant the necessary knowledge of the charge to enable him to prove his defense. The State should not heap upon the defendant two or more charges which might confuse him in his defense.

What is the effect of the failure of the accused to object to a duplicitous information? If the accused fails to object before arraignment, the right is deemed waived, and he may be convicted of as many offenses as there are charged. *Where the law with respect to an offense may be committed in any of the different modes provided by law, the indictment in the information is sufficient if the offense is alleged to have been committed in one, two or more modes specified therein. The various ways of committing the offense should be considered as a description of only one offense and the information cannot be dismissed on the ground of multifariousness.

What is the remedy in case of duplicity of offense? Should there be duplicity of offense in the information unless a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed, the accused must move for the quashal of the same before arraignment (Sec. 3, Rule 117). Otherwise, he is deemed to have waived the objection and may be found guilty of as many offenses as those charged and proved during the trial (Sec. 3, Rule 120). RATIO: The State should not heap upon the defendant two or more charges which might confuse him in his defense.

How does this rule on duplicitous informations affect the rules on continuing offenses (delito continuados)? Delito Continuado or Continuing offense exists if there is a plurality of acts performed during a period of time, unity of penal provision violated, and unity of criminal intent or purpose which means that two or more violations of the same penal provisions are united in one and the same intent or resolution leading to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim. In Santiago v. Garchitorena. In this case, 32 Amended Informations for violation of the Anti-Graft Law alleged that the offenses were committed on the same period of time, i.e., on or about October 17, 1988 favoring 32 aliens. The several acts were considered by the court as constituting only one crime. In appearance, a delito continuado consists of several crimes but in reality there is only one crime in the mind of the perpetrator.

Is Splitting of case allowed? NO. A defendant should not be harassed with various prosecution based upon the same act by splitting the same into various charges, all emanating from the same law violated when the prosecution could easily and well embody them in a single information (People v. Silva, 4 SCRA 95)

What is the Principle of Absorption?

- In cases of rebellion, other crimes committed in the course of crime are deemed absorbed in the crime of rebellion either as a means necessary for its commission or as an unintended effect of rebellion - They cannot be charged as separate offenses in themselves Exception: when the common crimes are committed without any political motivation. In such case, they will not be absorbed by rebellion. - This is explained in the case of Enrile v. Salazar (GR NO 92163, June 5, 1990) The crime of rebellion charged against him however is complexed with murder and multiple frustrated murders the intention of the prosecution was to make rebellion in its most serious form so as to make the penalty thereof in the maximum. The SC ruled that there is no such crime as Rebellion with murder and multiple frustrated murder. What Enrile et al can be charged of would be Simple Rebellion because other crimes such as murder or all those that may be necessary to the commission of rebellion is absorbed hence he should be entitiled for bail. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion though crimes in themselves are deemed absorbed in the single crime of rebellion. The test is whether or not the act was done in furtherance of a political end. The political motive of the act should be conclusively demonstrated.

Section 14. Amendment or Substitution

What may be amended? Only valid information may be amended. An information filed before the effectivity of the law punishing the offense may not be amended after the law had come into effect.

What constitutes formal amendment? Where: 1. it neither affects nor alters the nature of the offense charged; or 2. the charge does not deprive the accused of a fair opportunity to present his defense; or 3. It does not involve a change in the basic theory of the prosecution.

When is there an amendment in substance? There is an amendment in substance where it covers matters involving the recital of facts constituting the offense charged and determinative of the jurisdiction of the court. (Almeda v. Villaluz, GR No. L- 31665, August 6, 1975) Regarding the case sited above, Anent the second issue posed by the petitioner, the amendment of the information to include allegations of habitual delinquency and recidivism, after a previous plea thereto by the accused, is valid and in no way violates his right to be fully apprised before trial of the charges against him. Under section 13 of Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, the trial court has discretion to allow amendments to the information on all matters of form after the defendant has pleaded and during the trial when the same can be done without prejudice to the rights of the defendant. What are prohibited at this stage of the proceedings are amendments in substance. And the substantial matter in a complaint or information is the recital of facts constituting the offense charged and determinative of the jurisdiction of the court. All other matters are merely of form.

When can a complaint or information be amended (kinds of amendment or substitution)?

a. Before the accused enters his plea, General Rule: Before plea, a complaint or information can be amended in form or in substance without leave of court The prosecutor may: upgrade the offense allege qualifying and aggravating circumstances or change the offense charged WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT, provided there is evidence thereon which has been presented during the preliminary investigation. Exception: if the amendment will downgrade the offense or drop an accused from the complaint or information. In such case, the following requisites shall be observed: 1. The amendment must be made upon motion of the prosecutor 2. With notice to the offended party 3. With leave of court 4. The court must state its reason in resolving the motion 5. Copies of the resolution should be furnished all parties, especially the offended party

b. After the plea 1. If it covers only formal amendment- leave of court is obtained and such amendment is not prejudicial to the rights of the accused. 2. But when a fact supervenes which changes the nature of the crime charged in the information or upgrades it to a higher crime, in which case, there is a need for another arraignment of the accused under the amended information.

What steps should be taken by the prosecution so that amended information which downgrades the nature of the offense may be validly made? Why? The prosecution should file a motion for leave of court with notice to the offended party. This is for the protection of the interest of the offended party and to prevent possible abuse by the prosecution.

What is the test in determining whether the right of the accused is prejudiced by the amendment? In People v. Montenegro G.R. No. 45772, Mar. 25, 1988, . . .The test as to when the rights of an accused are prejudiced by the amendment of a complaint or information is when a defense under the complaint or information, as it originally stood, would no longer be available after the amendment is made, and when any evidence the accused might have, would be inapplicable to the complaint or information as amended. On the other hand, an amendment which merely states with additional precision something which is already contained in the original information, and which, therefore, adds nothing essential for conviction for the crime charged is an amendment to form that can be made at anytime. To allow at this stage the proposed amendment alleging conspiracy among all the accused, will make all of the latter liable not only for their own individual transgressions or acts but also for the acts of their co-conspirators.).

Can the prosecutor amend the information, which changes the nature of the crime after the arraignment? General Rule: The prosecutor can no longer amend the information after arraignment as it would prejudice the substantial rights of the accused. Exception: When a fact supervenes which changes the nature of the crime charged in the information or upgrades it to a higher crime, the prosecutor, with leave of court, may amend the information to allege such supervening fact and upgrade the crime charged to the higher crime brought about by such supervening fact.

Is the change in the nature of the offense due to supervening event a substantial amendment? No, it is merely a formal amendment We have to distinguish if the event is supervening or not, to be able to establish if its a formal amendment or not

Rule on supervening facts: Where after the first prosecution a new fact supervenes for

which the defendant is responsible, which changes the character of the offense and, together with the facts existing at the time, constitutes a new and distinct offense, the accused cannot be said to be in second jeopardy if indicted for the second offense.

What is a substitution and when it is proper? A complaint or information may be substituted if at any time before judgment, it appears that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense, and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other offense necessarily included therein, provided that he will not be placed in double jeopardy.

What are the limitations to the rule on substitution? 1. No judgment has yet been rendered; 2. The accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other offense necessarily included therein; and 3. The accused would not be placed in double jeopardy

Distinguish amendment from substitution AMENDMENT May invoke either formal or substantial changes Before plea, can be effected without leave of court An amendment as to form will not require another preliminary investigation and retaking of plea of the accused SUBSTITUTION Necessarily involves a substantial change Always done with leave of court Substitution of the information entails another preliminary investigation and plea to the new information.

Amended information refers to the same offense charged or to one, which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the original charge

Requires that new information is for a different offense which doesnt include or isnt necessarily included in the original charge

What is the test to determine if what is needed is amendment or substitution? Whether the new offense necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the original charge, or is an attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof

When can there be double jeopardy? To substantiate a claim of double jeopardy, the following must be proven: a. The first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second b. The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated c. The second jeopardy must be for the same offense, or the second offense includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt to commit the same or is a frustration thereof When does double jeopardy attach? In order that protection against double jeopardy may inure in favor of the accused, the following should be present: a. A valid complaint or information b. A competent court c. The defendant pleaded to the charge d. The defendant was acquitted or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.

*Note: Section 14 applies only to original case and not to appealed case.