People v Codilla; G.R Nos. 100720-23; 30 Jun 1993; 224 SCRA 104

FACTS:
Four separate complaints for rape were instituted against the accused-appellants. All three were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and were meted with the sentence of reclusion perpetua and ordered to indemnify each of their victims.

ISSUE(S):
Whether or not appellant Putulin may still challenge the validity of his warrantless arrest and detention.

RULING:
NO. Any objection involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure in the acquisition by the court of jurisdiction over the person of an accused must be made before he enters his plea, otherwise the objection is deemed waived. This issue is being raised for the first time by appellant before this Court. He did not move for the quashal of the information before the trial court on this ground. Hence, any irregularity attendant to his arrest, if any, was cured when he voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the trial court by entering a plea of not guilty and participating in the trial.

Assailed judgment is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS to the civil indemnity.

Tags: , ,

Category: Legal Chyme

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *