EXAMPLES OF FORMAL AMENDMENTS, July 27, 2016

CASE: VEGA VS. PANIS, G.R. No. L-40842, September 30, 1982
FACTS:
Felicitas Vargas filed a complaint for Attempted Rape against Leopoldo Lazo with the CFI of Zambales.
After the preliminary investigation, the judge found that only the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness has been
proven to have been committed. Accordingly, an information charging Lazo with the crime of Acts of
Lasciviousness was filed. Upon arraignment, Lazo pleaded Not Guilty. However, the prosecutor filed a motion
to admit an Amended Information to include an allegation that the offense was committed with the aggravating
circumstances of dwelling and night time, which was accepted by the court.
ISSUE: (1) WON the court had jurisdiction to allow the amendment of the original information to Acts of
Lasciviousness.
(2) WON the amended information to include the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and
nighttime prejudice the rights of the accused.
RULING: (1) No. Under Section 14, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, an information may be amended even after
arraignment at the sound discretion of the court and when the same can be done without prejudice to the rights
of the accused. If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper
offense, the court may dismiss the original complaint or information and order the filing of a new one charging
the proper offense, provided the defendant would not be placed thereby in double jeopardy, and may also
require the witnesses to give bail for their appearance at the trial.
(2) No. An amendment which neither adversely affects any substantial right of the accused is an
amendment as to a matter of form. The additional allegations that the crime was committed with the
aggravating circumstances of dwelling and nighttime do not have the effect of charging another offense
different or distinct from the charge contained in the original information.

CASE: PEOPLE VS. ABAD SANTOS, 76 PHIL. 444; G.R. No. L-447, June 17, 1946
FACTS:
Respondent Joseph Arcache has been accused of the crime of treason. Included in the information was
the phrase and other similar equipments. Arcache petitioned the respondent judges that the prosecution
should make more specific said phrase and should furnish a bill of particulars specifying what those other
similar equipments were or have it stricken from the information. The respondent judge granted the petition.
However, the special prosecutor, instead of submitting a bill of particulars, filed a motion for reconsideration on
the ground that it was contrary to law and that the court had acted in excess of its jurisdiction and/or with abuse
thereof.
ISSUE: WON the contention of the special prosecutor is correct.
RULING: No. The orders of the respondent judges are legal and valid, and that they were issued in the
exercise of sound judicial discretion, that is, for the protection of the rights and interests of respondent Arcache.
In criminal cases, it is not only the liberty but even the life of the accused may be at stake. It is always wise and
proper that the accused should be fully apprised of the true charges against them, and thus avoid all and any
possible surprise which might be detrimental to their rights and interests; and ambiguous phrases should not,
therefore, be permitted in criminal complaints or informations; and if any such phrase has been included
therein, on motion of the defense, before the commencement of the trial, the court should order either its
elimination as surplusage or the filing of the necessary specification, which is but an amendment in mere
matters of form.
Contributed by Sharon G. Balingit