Soria VS Desierto

GR Nos. 153524-25
January 31, 2005
FACTS
Police officers arrested petitioners Soria and Bista without a warrant for alleged illegal
possession of firearms at 8:30PM of May 13, 2001, a Sunday that immediately precedes the May 14,
2001 Elections. Petitioners were brought to Prosecutor Viloria a day after at 4:30PM and Soria was
released at 6:30PM of the same day or after 22 hours of detention, while Bista was released after 26
days as he has a standing warrant of arrest for another offense.
Petitioners, invoking Article 125, filed a complaint before the Ombudsman. The latter
dismissed the same for lack of merit, ruling that Sundays, holidays, and election days are excluded
in the computation periods as contemplated in Article 125.
ISSUES
Whether or not Sundays, holidays, and election days are included in the computation of
periods under Article 125.
RULING
NO, an election day or a special holiday, should not be included in the computation of the
period prescribed by law for the filing of complaint/information in courts in cases of warrantless
arrests, it being a “no-office day.”
The Court, citing Medina v. Orozco, Jr., reasoned that in these three no-office days, it was not
an easy matter for a fiscal to look for his clerk and stenographer, draft the information and search
for the Judge to have him act thereon, and get the clerk of court to open the courthouse, docket the
case and have the order of commitment prepared. And then, where to locate and the uncertainty of
locating those officers and employees could very well compound the fiscal’s difficulties. These are
considerations sufficient enough to deter us from declaring that Arthur Medina was arbitrarily
detained.