FACTS:
Defendant-appellee was charged with the crime of rape. Respondent judge dismissed the case, upon the motion of the defense, ruling that “the failure of the complaint filed by the offended party to allege that the acts committed by the accused were with ‘lewd designs’ does not give this Court jurisdiction to try the case.”
ISSUE(S):
Whether or not prosecution’s appeal of the dismissal placed the accused in double jeopardy.
HELD:
NO. The controverted dismissal was predicated on the erroneous contention of the accused that the complaint was defective and such infirmity affected the jurisdiction of the court a quo, and not on the right of the accused to a speedy trial and the failure of the Government to prosecute. The appealed order of dismissal did not terminate the action on the merits.
The order appealed from is SET ASIDE and the case is REMANDED to the court of origin for further proceedings in accordance with law.
