09) Campanano, Jr. v. Datuin

CRIMPRO DIGESTS G01 TOPIC: CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
ATTY. ARNO V. SANIDAD AUTHOR: Cruz, Jenell

09) CAMPANANO, JR. v. DATUIN; 2007 CA  SET ASIDE the resolutions of DOJ, remanding the case to the City Prosecutors Office of
Carpio Morales, J. QC for further investigation –ruled that since petitioner Campanano’s Counter-Affidavit to
respondent Datuin’s complaint was executed in QC, the Office of the City Prosecutor of QC
RECIT READY: had acquired jurisdiction to conduct preliminary investigation
Respondent Datuin was convicted of Estafa by RTC Pasig after a complaint was filed by
petitioner Campanano. Datuin later on filed a complaint for Incriminating Against Innocent Hence, petitioner Campanano filed a Petition for Review.
Persons before the Office of City Prosecutor of QC against petitioner Campanano. City
Prosecutor of QC dismissed Datuin’s complaint and ruled that it had no jurisdiction since the ISSUE/S: WON City Prosecutor of Quezon City had jurisdiction over the complaint for
case of estafa and testimony by Campanano were both filed in Pasig City. Datuin filed a incriminating innocent person- NO
petition for review with the DOJ but was dismissed. CA however reversed DOJ’s decision.
HELD:
The SC held that in criminal cases, venue is an essential element of jurisdiction and that -In criminal cases, venue is an essential element of jurisdiction and that jurisdiction of a court
jurisdiction of a court over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information
or information. In the present case, the complaint filed by Datuin in Office if the City
Prosecutor of QC does not allege that the crime or any of its elements were committed in QC. -For purposes of determining the place where the criminal action is to be instituted, Sec 15(a)
The only reference of QC was that it was Datuin’s residence. of R110 of the Revised Ruled on Criminal Procedure provides that:
DOCTRINE: In criminal cases, venue is an essential element of jurisdiction and that Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court
jurisdiction of a court over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its
or information. essential ingredients occurred.
FACTS: -This is a fundamental principle, the purpose of which is not to compel the defendant to
An information for violation of BP 22 was filed against respondent Antonio Datuin after a move to, and appear in, a different court from that of the province where the crime was
complaint for Estafa by Seishin International Corporation (represented by its president, committed as it would cause him great inconvenience in looking for his witnesses and other
petitioner David Campanano, Jr.) evidence in another place
After trial, respondent Datuin was convicted of Estafa by RTC Pasig. -In the present case, the complaint-affidavit for incriminating innocent person filed by
respondent Datuin with the Office of the City Prosecutor of QC does not allege that the crime
charged or any of its essential ingredients was committed in QC
Respondent Datuin appealed before CA and eventually with SC  DIMISSED and decision
became final and executory. the only reference to QC in the complaint-affidavit is that it is where respondent Datuin
resides
Later claiming that the complaint of Seishin Int’l Corp against him was false, unfounded, and
malicious in light of newly discovered evidence by Datuin, Datuin filed a complaint for -In any event, the allegations in the complaint-affidavit do not make out a clear probable
Incriminating Against Innocent Persons before the Office of City Prosecutor of Quezon City cause of incriminating innocent person sunder Art. 363 of RPC
against petitioner Campanano and Yasunobu Hirota.
WHEREFORE, petition is GRANTED. CA decision is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
City Prosecutor of QC DISMISSED respondent Datuin’s complaint for incriminating innocent The complaint of respondent Datuin for Incriminating Innocent Person filed against petitioner
person – ruled that it had no jurisdiction since the case of estafa was filed in Pasig City and Campanano is DISMISSED
the testimony by Campanano was also made in Pasig City. WINNER: Petitioner Campanano
Respondent Datuin filed a petition for review with the DOJ  DISMISSED – prosecutor did
not err in its ruling
Respondent filed MR  DENIED

09) Campanano, Jr. v. Datuin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

09) Campanano, Jr. v. Datuin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

09) Campanano, Jr. v. Datuin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMPRO DIGESTS G01 TOPIC: CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

ATTY. ARNO V. SANIDAD AUTHOR: Cruz, Jenell

Respondent filed MR  DENIED

You might also like