#12 ILAGAN VS ENRILE – CASTILLO TOPIC: HABEAS CORPUS DOCTRINES:
1. Special proceeding of habeas corpus inquires on the legality of one’s detention, but it is no longer proper if it appears that the person alleged to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an ocer under process issued by a court or judge or by virtue of a judgment, or order of a court of record, and that the court or judge had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order pursuant to Sec. 4, ule 1!". ". ight to preliminary investigation is #aivable and do not a$ect the validity of the %nformation &led nor the 'ourt’s jurisdiction as provided in (eople vs. 'asiano.
4. *or lack lack of evid eviden ence ce to link link peti petiti tion oner ers s to the the subversive actions, the 'ourt ordered their temporary release, but the respondents &led an
First Issue: (MAIN)
1. See octrine /o. /o. 1. 5he proper remedy remedy in this case is to &le in the 5' otion to >uash the 7arrant of rrest, and?or %nformation or to ask for reinvestigation of the case. ". @abe @abeas as corp corpus us coul could d not not lie lie afte afterr #arr #arran antt of commitment commitment #as issued by the 'ourt based on the %nformation &led. s provided in Sec. 14, ule 1!", a prisoner la#fully committed and charged #ith o$ense punishable by death, shall not be released, discharged or bailed, but if not punishable as such, may bail on judge’s discretion. discretion. Second Issue: (SUB-ISSUE)
1. 1AB9 ules on 'riminal (rocedure requires that no %nformat %nformation ion be &led to o$enses o$enses cogniCable cogniCable by 5' #ithou #ithoutt &rst &rst condu conducti cting ng prelim prelimina inary ry invest investiga igatio tion n eDce eDcept pt thos those e in Sec. Sec. E, ule ule 11". 11". @o#e @o#eve ver, r, the the Feri&cation &led by the 'ity (rosecutor stated that the %nformation #as &led pursuant to Sec. E, ule 11" and
he found sucient ground to hold them for trial. 5hus, preliminary investigation is not required prior to &ling of such %nformation. ". Sec. 9, ule 110 provides for instances #hen #arrantless arrest is la#ful. 5hus if the 0 detained la#yers fall either in a2 of that rule in Gagrante delicto2 or in b2 hot pursuit2, presentation of evidence is required, #hich is proper to be done in court.
0. See octrine /o. ". 5he trial court should not dismiss the %nformation if there is no preliminary investigation, but hold it in abeyance then conduct its o#n investigation or ask the &scal to reinvestigate. DISPOSITIVE: (etition dismissed for being moot and
academic because detained pursuant to the 7arrant of rrests issued in relation to the criminal case of ebellion &led against them.
