This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2006-01-23 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Movant/Respondent now argues that the Court erred in ruling that she exceeded her authority in the conduct of preliminary investigations and failed to observe the elementary procedural rules on bail. She stresses that under the then provisions of Section 17, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court, [1] she was clothed with authority to act on the Urgent Petition for Bail filed by accused Eva Malihan in Criminal Cases Nos. 01-1485 to 87 since said cases were then pending in her sala for preliminary investigation. [2] She also cites Borinaga v. Tamin [3] where this Court held that when bail is discretionary, the application for it may only be filed in the court where the case is pending, whether on preliminary investigation, trial or appeal. [4] | |||||
|
2004-07-14 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| It appears from the records that on August 23, 2001, private complainants Leonora Bituon, Florencio Cantada, Anita Mendoza, Rodelia Callo and Cael M. Glorioso (private complainants for brevity) filed three separate criminal complaints for syndicated estafa against Eva Malihan, Sister Trinidad Sinagbulo, Mely Vargas, Geraldine Sine Baldovino, Belen Liwanag, Juanita Sanchez and Nelia Tizon before the MTC, docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 01-1485 to 01-1487.[2] On August 24, 2001, acting upon a motion of private complainants,[3] herein complainant Judge conducted a preliminary investigation.[4] On the same day, she issued a warrant of arrest against the accused and recommended no bail for their provisional liberty.[5] On August 28, 2001, private complainants filed a motion to transfer accused Eva Malihan from the municipal jail to the provincial jail.[6] On August 29, 2001, complainant Judge required the Chief of Police of Dasmariñas, Cavite to comment on the motion to transfer within five days from receipt of the order.[7] Meanwhile, on August 31, 2001, accused Eva Malihan filed an urgent petition for bail.[8] On September 3, 2001, the private complainants filed a supplemental pleading to support their previous motion to transfer accused Eva Malihan.[9] Invoking that the Executive Judge has authority to supervise all detainees in the municipal jail of Dasmariñas, Cavite under Section 25 of Rule 114 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the private complainants sent copies of the motion to transfer and supplemental pleading to respondent. On September 4, 2001, complainant Judge required the private complainants in the criminal case to file their comment or opposition to the petition for bail.[10] However, on that same day, respondent issued two orders in connection with Criminal Cases Nos. 01-1485 to 01-1487. The first Order directed the transfer of the accused Eva Malihan from the Municipal Jail to the Provincial Jail,[11] while the second Order directed the Commissioner on Immigration and Deportation to hold and prevent the departure from the Philippines of the accused Eva Malihan while the cases are pending.[12] | |||||