SSgt. Jose M. Pacoy, vs. Hon. Afable E. Cajigal, et al.

G.R. No. 157472, September 28, 2007; per Austria-Martinez, J.

Facts

Information for homicide was filed, alleging that SSGT. Jose M. Pacoy, with intent to kill, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously shot his commanding officer 2Lt. Frederick Esquita with his armalite rifle hitting and sustaining upon 2Lt. Frederick Esquita multiple gunshot wounds on his body which caused his instantaneous death. The information likewise contains the statement, “With the aggravating circumstance of killing [his commanding officer] in disregard of his rank.” The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge of homicide. On the same day after the arraignment, Hon. Afable E. Cajigal ordered the prosecutor to amend the information to murder, based on the Judge’s view that the aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank qualified the crime to murder. The designation of the offense in the information was amended accordingly.

Issue

Whether the respondent judge committed grave abuse of discretion in amending the Information after petitioner had already pleaded not guilty to the charge in the Information for Homicide.

Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled that respondent judge did not commit grave abuse of discretion in amending the Information. Under the first paragraph of Section 14, Rule 110, or a substitution of information under the second paragraph thereof, the rule is that where the second information involves the same offense, or an offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the first information, an amendment of the information is sufficient.

In the present case, the change of the offense charged from Homicide to Murder is merely a formal amendment and not a substantial amendment or a substitution. There was no change in the recital of facts constituting the offense charged or in the determination of the jurisdiction of the court. The averments in the amended Information for Murder are exactly the same as those already alleged in the original Information for Homicide. Thus, we find that the amendment made in the caption and preamble from "Homicide" to "Murder" as purely formal.