Practice question
Before arraignment, a respondent promptly establishes that an applicable preliminary investigation was omitted and asks for it. Is automatic acquittal the appropriate consequence solely from that omission?
- No; the proper response is to address the investigation right, ordinarily holding proceedings in abeyance for the appropriate prosecutorial investigation
- Yes; every omission is an adjudication of innocence
- Yes; the prosecutor's omission repeals the charged statute
- No; the court must simply ignore the timely request
- Yes; all court proceedings are necessarily void
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2020/jun2020/gr_232192_2020.html — Miranda v. People, G.R. No. 232192, June 22, 2020, MAIN decision (absence of preliminary investigation and waiver before plea).
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/aug2011/gr_175289_2011.html — Villarin v. People, G.R. No. 175289, August 31, 2011, MAIN decision (timely assertion and waiver of preliminary investigation).
- https://comanialaw.com/doj-department-circular-no-015-series-of-2024/ — Reproduced DOJ D.C. No. 015, series of 2024, §§12–20 (inquest and remedies); issuance upheld in Meking.
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/4/70233 — Meking v. Remulla, G.R. No. 280455, November 11, 2025, EN BANC MAIN decision (DOJ-NPS rules and executive charging standard).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.