Practice question
A court previously found probable cause for an arrest warrant. Later, the prosecution moves to withdraw the information, submitting its revised assessment and supporting materials. The complainant argues that the earlier warrant ruling permanently forbids any reassessment. Under Philippine Investment Two v. Sebastian, which is correct?
- The warrant ruling makes withdrawal impossible forever
- The court may independently reassess the record and decide the withdrawal motion; the prior warrant finding is not a categorical bar
- Only the complainant may reopen the record
- The revised prosecution view automatically overrules the court
- The prior warrant ruling conclusively establishes guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Legal references
- https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1987/jun1987/gr_l-53373_1987.html — Crespo v Mogul, GRL53373, June30 1987, ENBANC MAIN decision (judicial control after filing).
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/70443 — Philippine Investment Two (SPV-AMC), Inc. v. Sebastian, G.R. Nos. 238729-30, April 8, 2026, EN BANC MAIN decision (independent assessment on withdrawal and prior arrest probable-cause finding).
- 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.