This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-08-12 |
TINGA, J, |
||||
| The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that an information shall be deemed sufficient if it states, among others, the designation of the offense given by the statute and the acts of omissions complained of as constituting the offense.[19] However, the Court has clarified in several cases that the designation of the offense, by making reference to the section or subsection of the statute punishing, it is not controlling; what actually determines the nature and character of the crime charged are the facts alleged in the information.[20] The Court's ruling in U.S. v. Lim San[21] is instructive:…Notwithstanding the apparent contradiction between caption and body, we believe that we ought to say and hold that the characterization of the crime by the fiscal in the caption of the information is immaterial and purposeless, and that the facts stated in the body of the pleading must determine the crime of which the defendant stands charged and for which he must be tried. The establishment of this doctrine is permitted by the Code of Criminal Procedure, and is thoroughly in accord with common sense and with the requirements of plain justice…. | |||||
|
2004-07-29 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| While it is fundamental that every element of the offense must be alleged in the information,[53] matters of evidence -- as distinguished from the facts essential to the nature of the offense -- need not be averred.[54] Whatever facts and circumstances must necessarily be alleged are to be determined by reference to the definition and the essential elements of the specific crimes.[55] | |||||