7/23/2019 Virtuoso v Mun. Judge

1/1

Virtuoso v. Municipal Judge, 82 SCRA 191, March 21, 1978

Facts:

On February 23, 1978, petitioner Francisco Virtouso, Jr., who file an application for the writ ofhabeas corpus, pre!ise his plea for liberty pri!arily on the "roun that the preli!inary

e#a!ination which le to the issuance of a warrant of arrest a"ainst hi! was a useless for!alityas responent $unicipal Ju"e of $ari%eles, &ataan, '1( faile to !eet the strict stanarre)uire by the *onstitution to ascertain whether there was a probable cause. '2( +e liewise

alle"e that asie fro! the constitutional infir!ity that tainte the proceure followe in the

preli!inary e#a!ination, the bail i!pose was clearly e#cessi%e. '3( -t was in the a!ount of

1/, 000.00, the alle"e robbery of a V set bein" i!pute to petitioner.

s praye for, the *ourt issue a writ of habeas corpus, returnable to it on enesay, $arch 14,

1978. 5esponent Ju"e, in his return file on $arch 8, 1978, 6ustifie the issuance of thewarrant of arrest, alle"in" that there was no i!propriety in the way the preli!inary e#a!ination

was conucte. s to the e#cessi%e character of the bail, he asserte that while it was fi#e in

accorance with the 5e%ise &ail &on uie issue by the #ecuti%e Ju"e in &ataan in 1977,he ne%ertheless reuce the a!ount to 8, 000.00.

-ssue:hether or not the proceure by responent Ju"e in ascertainin" the e#istence of probable

cause was constitutionally eficient

5ulin":he upre!e *ourt eclare that the petition is "rante in accorance with the ter!s of the

5esolution of this *ourt of $arch 14, 1978.

he *ourt issue the followin" 5esolution:;ctin" on the %erbal petition of counsel for petitioner Francisco Virtouso, Jr., the *ourt

5esol%e pursuant to section 191of resiential