PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs. DIONISIO LAPURA y CAJAN, accused-appellant Crime: Murder of Petronilo Lim FACTS: At 7:30 in the morning of February 19, 1988, Petronilo Lim (!e"ial agent of the #riminal $n%etigation &er%i"e' a on board hi "ar, ith hi iter, dri%ing along )onorio
Lo!e* +l%d, +alut, -ondo, Manila .ut a he tarted loing don the "ar before turning left to $nfanta &treet, to !eron uddenly "ame forard and fired at him Lim, all bloodied tried to fire ba"/ uing hi baby armalite )e died from 3 gunhot ound -he itne to the in"ident, dgardo &amon identified ioniio La!ura in a !oli"e line2u! to be the !eron ho !oitioned himelf at the left ide of the %i"tim "ar and ho fired a 4 "aliber !itol at the %i"tim La!ura a arreted by !oli"e offi"er at the houe o f a fello mui"ian, anilo #abrera (La!ura i a "ombo drummer' )e and #abrera, along ith another mui"ian friend, 5eynaldo lie*er, ere brought to &tation 1 at 6orth +ay, -ondo, -ondo, Manila, here tatement ere ta/en Later, #ol Maganto informed La!ura of hi being a u!e"t in the /illing of Lim be"aue he reembled the "artogra!h of the /iller #abrera added that they ere at"hing tele%iion hen the arreting !oli"emen uddenly uddenl y entered their houe houting, ou ou are 6PA, 6PA, no one mut mo%e La!ura "ontend that People that People vs. Opida here the #ourt eonerated the a!!ellant for nonober%an"e of "ertain of hi "ontitutional right a an a""ued hould alo be a!!lied in a"uitting him )e allege that Li/e !ida and Mar"elo in that "ae, the "ontitutional right of herein a!!ellant ha%e been groly %iolated From the %ery time that he a arreted ithout arrant on February ;4, 1988 and detained at
Issue: (1'
of #ourt, before the filling of the "ae i " oneuential (;' $ue: <6 the !ida ruling hould alo be a!!lied to the a!!ellant (1) Held: 6o &u"h di"re!an"y i immaterial
-he in%etigating fi"al "ertifi"ated that: $ hereby "ertify that an e2!arte in%etigation in thi "ae ha been "ondu"ted by me in a""ordan"e ith la= that there i reaonable ground to belie%e that the offene "harged ha been "ommitted= that the a"" ued i !robably guilty thereof and that the filing of this information is with the prior authority and approval of the City Fiscal. Abent "on%in"ing e%iden"e to the "ontrary, the !reum!tion of regularity in the !erforman"e of offi"ial fun"tion ha to be u!held Moreo%er, thi matter hould ha%e been raied b elo in a !ro!er motion to uah> that a!!ellant "ould ha%e done but did not &ettled i the rule that u"h "ertifi"ation i not an indi!enable !art of, let alone in%alidate e%en by it aben"e, an information Sec. 4. Duty of investigating fiscal. - If the investigating fiscal finds cause to hold the respondent for trial he shall prepare the resolution and corresponding information. !!! $n !aing, the uetion of hether or not a !reliminary in%etigation ha been !ro!erly "ondu"ted i itelf one that hould be inter!oed !rior to an arraignment )ere, a!!e llant did not do o before entering hi !lea of not guilty to the "harge (2) Held: 6o, -he !ida ruling doe not a!!ly to the a""ued !ida i !redi"ated on to %ital !remie: (a' the trial ?udge ! al!able !artiality, a ell a the irregular manner in hi"h he "ondu"ted hi interrogation of the a""ued and their itne, and (b' the admiion of an etra?udi"ial "onfeion de!ite trong e%iden"e of manhandling by the !oli"e -hee "ir"umtan"e are not !reent in thi "ae uring trial, hile the ?udge did !ro!ound uetion to the itnee, they "learly a!!ear to be "larifi"atory and "ertainly not ad%erarial in "hara"ter 5elati%e to hi alleged arrantle arret, he ha ai%ed, by filing a !etition for bail any irregularity attendant thereto $ndeed, b y hi a!!li"ation for bail, and by entering a !lea of not guilty and then ubmitting to the !ro"eeding belo, a!!ellant mut be deemed to ha%e foregone hi right to !reliminary in%etigation and to uetion any irregularity that might ha%e attended u"h in%etigation
-he "on%i"tion of La!ura i affirmed
