G.R. No. 47081 - JANUARY 1941 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. No. 47081January 31, 1941 People of the Philippines vs. Rafael Pascua, et al. G.R. No. 47193January 27, 1941 In re: Hugo Ocampo Cu Jongco. Remigia Valuis vs. Viuda e Hijos De Cu Toco G.R. No. 47433January 20, 1941 Eugeniano Borja vs. Faustino Saminiano, et al. G.R. No. 47777January 13, 1941 N.T. Hasim vs. Marcelo T. Boncan, et al. G.R. No. 46745January 13, 1941 Angel Gonzalez vs. El Arzobispo Catolico Romano de Manila The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Rafael Pascua, et al. In re: Hugo Ocampo Cu Jongco. Remigia Valuis vs. Viuda e Hijos De Cu Toco Eugeniano Borja vs. Faustino Saminiano, et al. N.T. Hasim vs. Marcelo T. Boncan, et al. Angel Gonzalez vs. El Arzobispo Catolico Romano de Manila The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 47081             January 31, 1941

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,petitioner,
vs.
RAFAEL PASCUA AND PORFIRIO PAGADUAN,respondents.

Office of the Solicitor-General Ozaeta and Assistant Attorney Amparo for petitioner.
Victoriano V. Valle for respondent Pascua.
Ignacio B. Alcuaz for respondent Pagaduan.

LAUREL,J.:

This is a petition for a writ ofcertiorarito review the decision rendered by the Court of Appeals in the above-entitled case principally on the ground that said court erred in not forwarding the case to this court under the provisions of sections 138 and 145-K of the Revised Administrative Code as amended by Commonwealth Acts Nos. 3 and 259. It is contended by the petitioner that the penalty for the complex crime or robbery with homicide prescribed by article 294, No. 1, of the Revised Penal Code isreclusion perpetuato death, and that, therefore, the Court of Appeals should have certified the case to this court under the provisions of the sections already referred to above.

Section 145-K, as amended, of the Revised Administrative Code refers specifically to criminal cases which should be certified by the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court under certain conditions. Although the offense committed here is designated as a complex crime of robbery with homicide, the facts involved and not the classification of the offense charged are controlling, and we are inclined to assume that if the Court of Appeals declined or failed elevate the case to this court, this was advisedly done by the Court of Appeals upon review of the records and consideration of the evidence presented. On the other hand, to all intents and purposes, the present petition is an exception to and an appeal by the Government from a judgment of conviction, a practice not sanctioned by law or authority. The petition is denied without costs. So ordered.

Avanceña, C. J., Imperial, Diaz, and Horrilleno, JJ.,concur.