Professional Documents
Culture Documents
232) Icasiano V Sandiganbayan
232) Icasiano V Sandiganbayan
95642
May 28, 1992
Lopez, AMC
AURELIO G. ICASIANO, JR., petitioner vs. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN
and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents
Topic: Double Jeopardy
Facts:
1. Romana Magbago filed an administrative complaint against Judge
Icasiano for grave abuse of authority, manifest partiality and
incompetence.
a. The case arose from two orders of detention issued by the
Judge against Magbago for her refusal to comply with fifth
writ of execution
b. However, Supreme Court dismissed this administrative case.
2. Meanwhile, Magabago also filed in the Ombudsman against Judge
Icasiano for violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
(docketed as TBP 924)
3. Special Prosecutor recommended the dismissal of the case for lack of
merit. Such recommendation was approved by the Tanodbayan. The
resolution was released on April 1988.
4. However, Office of Tanodbayan received another complaint from
Magbago which no was docketed as TBP 546. The date of filing is
not shown but the case was among those transmitted to the newly
created Sandiganbayan; and unfortunately, these records didnt
contain the records of the dismissal of TBP 924.
5. Prosecutor Cruz was assigned to investigate TBP 546 and he
recommended filing of information in January 1990. Special
Prosecution Officer adopted recommendation
6. Hence, an information was filed with the Sandiganbayan, docketed
as Crim. Case 14563.
7. Icasiano filed a motion for reinvestigation on the ground that he has
already been exonerated in Admin. Matter No. MTJ-87-81. Hence,
the court ordered the prosecutor to look into administrative matter
8. Special Prosecutor Querubin responded that there were no records of
such administrative matter. Hence, Sandiganbayan denied motion for
reinvestigation because seeing that the special prosecutor had no