1. CERTIORARI; CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. — The refusal to hear witnesses offered by the defense in a criminal action would constitute error but is not an excess of jurisdiction to be remedied by certiorari.

The complaint in this case does not allege that the court which convicted the petitioner had no jurisdiction to try the case. Neither does it allege that in the prosecution of the case there has been any affirmative action by the judge outside of his jurisdiction. It simply alleges that he has failed to take action; that he has refused to hear the witnesses for the defendant. This, if true, would constitute error, but it would be error committed by the judge in the exercise of a jurisdiction which he possessed. The remedy by certiorari does not apply to this case. The petition is denied.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Mapa and Ladd, JJ., concur.